Covarrubias v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. May 29, 2007) (alien smuggling, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(E)(i), does not end once the noncitizen crosses the border, but continues until the initial transporter who brings the noncitizen into the U.S. ceases to transport the person).

Kharana v. Gonzales, 487 F.3d 1280 (9th Cir. May 29, 2007) (noncitizen who pleads guilty to fraud in misappropriating more than $10,000 but later repays the entire loss, so the victims have been made whole, has not "paid down" the "loss to the victims" below the statutory threshold so that her offense no longer qualifies as an aggravated felony fraud offense, under INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i)).

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").

Igwebuike v. Caterisano, ___ F.3d ___ , ___, 2007 WL 1180300 (4th Cir. April 20, 2007) ("An arrest or charge by itself is not substantial evidence of drug trafficking.

Igwebuike v. Caterisano, ___ F.3d ___ , 2007 WL 1180300 (4th Cir. April 20, 2007) (an arrest for drug trafficking, without any of the facts of the underlying arrest, is insufficient evidence to sustain a reason to believe charge; the DHS should have requested additional evidence; "The drug trafficking arrest, however, does raise underlying questions regarding eligibility, see 103.2(b)(8), and the Director was obliged to request further information, such as arrest or police reports, if he believed it was necessary to determine Igwebuike's eligibility for relief.

Senica v. INS, ___ F.3d ___, No. 92-70423 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 1993) (parent's knowledge of a child's ineligibility for admission to the U.S. can be imputed to the child to preclude discretionary relief under INA 212(k); effectively prevents a parent from making a derivative claim for a waiver under INA 241(f) as the parent of a noncitizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence).

Soriano v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. Apr. 5, 2007) (any noncitizen seeking admission to the U.S. who participates in a scheme to aid other aliens in an illegal entry is inadmissible under INA 212(a)(6)(E)(i), regardless of whether the assisting individual was present at the border crossing).

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (procedural due process protections apply to noncitizens in removal proceedings: "when facing deportation ... aliens are entitled to procedural due process, which provides an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."), quoting United States v. Aguirre-Tello, 353 F.3d 1199, 1204 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc).

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).