Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. Nov. 29, 2006) (success in establishing persecution for purposes of withholding of removal necessarily implies standards for asylum have also been met; upon remand after determining conviction was not a particularly serious crime for asylum purposes, only remaining issue in asylum claim is whether asylum should be granted as a matter of discretion), following INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 448-449 (1987); Ghebremedhin v. Ashcroft, 392 F.3d 241, 244 (7th Cir. 2004).

Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. Nov. 29, 2006) (deferring to BIAs determination that refugee status automatically terminates upon adjustment to LPR and therefore 209(c) waiver is unavailable to former refugee-LPR seeking to re-adjust to avoid removal).

Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. Nov. 29, 2006) (where BIA issues any language supporting decision of IJ beyond mere summary affirmance without opinion, Chevron deference must be given), distinguishing Smirko v. Ashcroft, 387 F.3d 279 (3d Cir. 2004).

Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683 (7th Cir. Nov. 29, 2006) (assuming jurisdiction exists to challenge BIA decision to streamline vs. sent to panel, regulations at 8 C.F.R. 1003.1(e) require "only that the BIA not review cases resolving novel issues by affirmance without opinion."; where any additional language given, the regulations do not apply), distinguishing Smirko v. Ashcroft, 387 F.3d 279 (3d Cir. 2004).

Petrov v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 800, 2006 WL 2846451 (7th Cir. Oct. 6, 2006) ("Because Tunis did not mention that subject, it does not contain a holding on the issue. See Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 91, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 140 L.Ed.2d 210 (1998); United States v. L.A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc., 344 U.S. 33, 38, 73 S.Ct. 67, 97 L.Ed. 54 (1952).").

Petrov v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 800, 2006 WL 2846451 (7th Cir. Oct. 6, 2006) (aggravated felony conviction bars court of appeals, under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(C) ["no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed" an aggravated felony], from reviewing noncitizen's claims under the Convention), following Hamid v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 642 (7th Cir. 2005).

Petrov v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 800, 2006 WL 2846451 (7th Cir. Oct. 6, 2006) (aggravated felony conviction bars court of appeals, under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(C) ["no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed" an aggravated felony], from reviewing noncitizen's claims under the Convention), following Hamid v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 642 (7th Cir. 2005).

Petrov v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 800, 2006 WL 2846451 (7th Cir. Oct. 6, 2006) (question whether conviction constitutes a particularly serious crime, under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(C), precluding political asylum or withholding of deportation, is held to be a discretionary decision not subject to petition for review jurisdiction in the court of appeals).

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/7th/054696p.pdf

Amouzadeh v. Winfrey, ___ F.3d ___,2006 WL 2831020 (5th Cir. Oct. 5, 2006) (federal conviction of unlawful procurement of naturalization, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1425(a), constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude under INA 237(a)(2)(A)(ii)). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/5th/0450903cv0p.pdf

Brue v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 1227, 2006 WL 2831216 (10th Cir. Oct. 6, 2006) (petition for review from removal order denied, rejecting claim that because he met the statutory requirements for naturalization when his adoptive parents tendered an application on his behalf, he automatically acquired citizenship and was not subject to removal).

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/059569.html