Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (counsels ineffective assistance in preparing and filing visa petition was not a violation of due process where petitioner could not show a deficiency relating to fundamental fairness of removal hearing itself).

Matter of Nwozuzu, 24 I. & N. Dec. 609 (BIA 2008) (to obtain derivative citizenship under former INA 321(a) (1994), person must have acquired LPR status while he or she was under 18 years old).

Refugees are considered LPRs retroactively as of the date of admission. 8 C.F.R. 209.1(e).

United States v. Snellenberger, 548 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2008) (per curiam) (en banc) (finding, in dictum, that a plea of no-contest to a charge phrased in the conjunctive (using "and") established conviction of all the conjunctive elements).

Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044. (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (April 30, 2001 filing deadline for adjustment of status under INA 245(i), which allows qualifying relatives of LPRs to apply more quickly for immigrant visas, is a statute of repose and thus not subject to equitable tolling for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel).

Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (counsels ineffective assistance in preparing and filing visa petition was not a violation of due process where petitioner could not show a deficiency relating to fundamental fairness of removal hearing itself).

Sharkey v. Quarantillo, 541 F.3d 75 (2d Cir. Sept. 3, 2008) (district court had jurisdiction to determine whether DHS had followed proper procedure, under 8 C.F.R. 246.1, in rescission of noncitizens LPR status; fact that noncitizen was not properly granted LPR status does not mean DHS can revoke status without following rescission procedures).

Sharkey v. Quarantillo, 541 F.3d 75 (2d Cir. Sept. 3, 2008) ("because the agency has a non-discretionary duty to provide LPRs with proof of their status, see Etuk v. Slattery, 936 F.2d 1433, 1448 (2d Cir.1991) (holding that the relevant statutes and regulations require that LPRs be provided with documentation of their rightful legal status (emphasis added)), Section 1252(a)(2)(B) does not strip the district court of jurisdiction to review whether Sharkey is owed proof of her status.")

Alvear-Velez v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 672 (7th Cir. Sept. 2, 2008) (res judicata does not prevent DHS from charging noncitizen with deportability based on aggravated felony conviction where IJ had held in prior proceeding that same conviction was not a CMT and charged aggravated felony ground had not yet been created by statute; "the rule against claim splitting, which is one component of res judicata, is inapplicable when a statutory change creates a course of action unavailable in the previous action. Cf. Car Carriers, Inc. v.

Vaca-Tellez v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. Sept. 2, 2008) (complaint, indicating burglar of a vehicle with intent to commit theft, combined with clerks minutes showing entry of guilty plea, sufficient to find noncitizen had been convicted of aggravated felony attempted theft).