(C)  Stop-Time Rule.  Although there was no stop-time rule applicable to suspension of deportation prior to September 30, 1996, IIRAIRA made the stop-time rule of INA § 240(d), as it applies to the service of an OSC or NTA, applicable to all non-NACARA applications for suspension filed after that date.[422]  It may be possible for a noncitizen retroactively barred from suspension of deportation to apply for cancellation of removal through a process called “repapering,”[423] in which the DHS terminates deportation proceedings under former law, and initiates removal proceedings by filing and serving an NTA.

[422] IIRAIRA § 309(c)(5).  See also Casillas-Figueroa v. Gonzales, 419 F.3d 447 (6th Cir. Aug. 12, 2005) (stop-time rule applied to noncitizen’s application for suspension of deportation, even though application was initially granted by IJ prior to IIRAIRA); Suassuna v. INS, 342 F.3d 578 (6th Cir. Sept. 4, 2003) (continuous physical presence for suspension of deportation ends upon service of the order to show cause, even if order was issued before enactment of the stop-time rule).  But see Aoun v. INS, 342 F.3d 503 (6th Cir. Aug. 29, 2003) (“stop time” rule inapplicable where, given lengthy government delays, including continuances and administrative closure, noncitizen was prejudiced in his ability to have his suspension application decided under less stringent immigration rules).

[423] See Alcaraz v. INS, 384 F.3d 1150 (9th Cir. Oct. 1, 2004) (review granted to determine whether noncitizen retroactively barred from suspension of deportation by stop-time rule can apply for cancellation of removal through “repapering” process).

Second Circuit

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - STOP-TIME RULE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY TO CONVICTION PREDATING ENACTMENT OF RULE
Makadji v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 450 (2d Cir. Dec. 5, 2006) (stop-time rule for suspension of deportation, providing that period of continuous residence ended upon the commission of certain offenses, was triggered by petitioner's criminal conviction, even through that offense occurred prior to enactment of the 1996 amendments to the INA).

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - STOP-TIME RULE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY TO CONVICTION PREDATING ENACTMENT OF RULE
Tabile v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___ (2d Cir. Dec. 5, 2006) (stop-time rule for suspension of deportation, providing that period of continuous residence ended upon the commission of certain offenses, was triggered by petitioner's criminal conviction, even through that offense occurred prior to enactment of the 1996 amendments to the INA). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/052955p.pdf

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION
Tanov v. INS, 443 F.3d 195 (2d Cir. Apr. 4, 2006) (former suspension of deportation is unavailable to noncitizens who were paroled into and then ordered excluded from the United States prior to April 1, 1997).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/034321p.pdf

Third Circuit

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - CONTINUOUS PRESENCE REQUIREMENT - STOP-TIME RULE - RETROACTIVE APPLICATION DID NOT VIOLATE DUE PROCESS
Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (retroactive application of the stop-time rule did not violate due process).

RELIEF - CONTINUOUS PRESENCE REQUIREMENT - STOP-TIME RULE - EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL CLAIM REJECTED
Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (respondent cannot re-start clock by failing to appear for removal proceeding and then waiting an additional 10 years).

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - STOP-TIME RULE
Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (continuous physical presence clock did not begin to run again after an administrative closure; administrative closure is not a termination proceedings; it only removes the case from the IJs calendar).

Eighth Circuit

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION
Geach v. Chartoff, 444 F.3d 940 (8th Cir. Mar. 2, 2006) (advance parole regulation, 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(4)(ii) (1991) (amended 1996), denies suspension of deportation to aliens admitted on advance parole, but who otherwise meet the statutory requirements for suspension).

Ninth Circuit

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - RETROACTIVITY - BIA USED IMPERMISSIBLY RETROACTIVE APPLICATION TO DISQUALIFY PETITIONER FROM FORMER SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION
Anderson v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __, 2007 WL 2264698 (9th Cir. Aug. 9, 2007) (repeal of former suspension of deportation relief impermissibly retroactive when applied to a noncitizen who became eligible for naturalization in 1990, but waited until 1995 before making the application with the intent of becoming eligible for suspension of deportation in the event the INS placed noncitizen in removal proceedings upon making the application for naturalization).

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - RETROACTIVITY OF LEGISLATION REPEALING SUSPENSION
Lopez-Castellanos v Gonzales, 437 F.3d 848 (9th Cir. Feb. 16, 2006) (Congress did not make the elimination of suspension of deportation retroactive with sufficient clarity to disturb settled expectations, just as it did not do so with respect to waivers of deportability under former INA 212(c)), following INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001)).