Zhu v. Gonzales

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that federal appellate courts lack jurisdiction “to review timeliness determinations that are based on an assess- ment of the facts and circumstances of a particular case”
• noting that we review the IJ’s decision when it affects the BIA’s decision
• explaining when IJ examined facts and circumstances in concluding petitioner did not qualify for exception to deadline, our court cannot review decision
• reversing the BIA’s denial of the withholding of removal and remanding to the BIA “with instructions to enter an order withholding removal”
• explaining “‘a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy . . . shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion’”
• reviewing both the decisions of the BIA and IJ because of, in part, the “paucity of findings of fact, [and] the conclusional perfunctoriness of the BIA’s opinion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).