United States v. Zeng, __ F.Supp.2d __, 2007 WL 902380 (N.D.Cal. Mar, 22 2007) (granting motion to withdraw guilty plea where Rule 11 violation occurred because defendant was prevented, through cultural mores, from interrupting his attorney during the guilty plea phase, and defendant did not understand the nature of the charges against him, or the immigration consequences thereof, until he was later able to read a Chinese translation of the plea agreement).

Elkimya v. Department of Homeland Sec., 484 F.3d 151(2d Cir. Apr. 12, 2007) (court has jurisdiction to consider motion for bail pending resolution of appeal of BIA decision to the circuit court), citing Mapp v. Reno, 241 F.3d 221 (2d Cir.2001).

Even if client has made a false claim to U.S. citizenship, the false claim ground of inadmissibility requires it to be done for some "purpose or benefit" under federal or state law, which does not include an employment benefit. Matter of Oduor, A75 904 456 (BIA March 15, 2005), available on lexis and westlaw ("citizen or national" assertion on an I-9 form does not constitute a false claim of U.S. citizenship for either deportation or inadmissibility purposes).

Dababneh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (7th Cir. Dec. 20, 2006) (Department of Homeland Security may indicate in the NTA that it will give the alien subsequent notice of the precise time and place of the hearing once it files the NTA with the appropriate immigration court).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/054001p.pdf

Ballesteros v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2007 WL 926831 (10th Cir. March 29, 2007) (Idaho felony conviction of possession of a controlled substance, reversing Ballesteros v. Gonzales, 452 F.3d 1153 (10th Cir. 2006), only to the extent the prior decision is inconsistent Lopez v. Gonzalez, 127 S.Ct. 625 (2006)).

United States v. Alvarez-Hernandez, __ F.3d __, 2007 WL 601991 (9th Cir. Feb. 28, 2007) (a sentence that has been suspended in full [i.e. defendant served no time in prison] does not trigger 12 level sentence enhancement under U.S.S.G. 2L1.2(b)(1)(B), for having a previous conviction for "a felony drug trafficking offense for which the sentence imposed was 13 months or less").

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (rejecting claim that due process and equal protection are offended by stop-time rule for cancellation of removal, under 8 U.S.C. 1229b(a), (d), on grounds there is no rational basis exists for the legislature to provide a stop-time rule for 8 U.S.C. 1229b(a)(2)'s "continuous presence" requirement when no such rule exists for 8 U.S.C. 1229b(a)(1)'s five-year requirement; noncitizen lacks protected liberty interest in grant of cancellation of removal), citing United States v. Aguirre-Tello, 353 F.3d 1199, 1204-05 (10th Cir.

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (rejecting due process lack of rational basis claim as to cancellation stop-time rule: "the stop-time rule is rationally grounded. See Appiah v. INS, 202 F.3d 704, 709-10 (4th Cir. 2000) (applying rational basis review to substantive due process and equal protection challenges to stop-time rule). With the stop-time rule, "Congress intended to prevent aliens from continuing to accumulate time toward the continuous residency requirement after INS had issued an order to show cause to an alien." Sibanda v.

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (rejecting argument that the INS's failure to apprise him that he was entitled to communicate with Mexican consular or diplomatic officers under the Vienna Convention and immigration regulations violates Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and 8 C.F.R. 236.1(e), on grounds the argument was waived because he failed to assert the issue before the IJ, and, in any event, Torres could not show that the violation resulted in any prejudice).

United States v. Snellenberger, 480 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. April 3, 2007) (a minute order, coupled with a charging document, is not sufficient under Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005), to establish the nature of a prior conviction as a crime of violence for purposes of sentence enhancement for a conviction of illegal reentry after deportation); see United States v. Diaz-Argueta, 447 F.3d 1167, 1169 (9th Cir. 2006) (a minute order is "not a judicial record that can be relied upon" to establish the nature of a prior conviction).