Bakarian v. Mukasey, 541 F.3d 775 (7th Cir. Sept. 4, 2008) (noncitizen not excused from preserving retroactivity issue for appeal by raising it before the BIA; it was not futile to bring issue before the BIA where U.S. Supreme Court case provided new means to argue against older BIA precedent decision).

Mota v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir.Sept. 17, 2008) (domestic violence conviction does not bar non-LPR cancellation of removal under INA 240A(b)(1)(B), since the conviction occurred prior to Sept. 30, 1996, the effective date of the domestic violence ground of removal).

Pina v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 5 (1st Cir. Sept. 12, 2008) ("legal custody" for purposes of the Child Citizenship Act is to be determined by reference to the relevant state law).

Esquivel v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 919 (7th Cir. Sept. 11, 2008) (former INA 212(c) relief unavailable to noncitizen who was convicted, by jury, of murder in 1981), following United States v. De Horta Garcia, 519 F.3d 658, 661 (7th Cir.2008) ("relief under 212(c) is not available to any alien whose removal proceeding began after repeal except to those who affirmatively abandoned rights or admitted guilt in reliance on 212(c) relief."); Montenegro v. Ashcroft, 355 F.3d 1035, 1037 (7th Cir. 2004).

Hassan v. Chertoff, 543 F.3d 564 (9th Cir. Sept. 11, 2008) (noncitizen traveled outside United States on advance parole while adjustment application was pending; DHS denied application while noncitizen was outside the U.S.; noncitizen placed in expedited removal upon attempted return to U.S.; court lacks jurisdiction to review DHS denial of adjustment application and revocation of advance parole).

Hassan v. Chertoff, 543 F.3d 564 (9th Cir. Sept. 11, 2008) (noncitizen traveled outside United States on advance parole while adjustment application was pending; DHS denied application while noncitizen was outside the U.S.; noncitizen placed in expedited removal upon attempted return to U.S.; court lacks jurisdiction to review DHS denial of adjustment application and revocation of advance parole).

Figueroa v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 487 (9th Cir. Sept. 10, 2008) (IJ applied wrong standard in requiring that deportation would result in unconscionable harm to noncitizens children; IJ also erred by looking only at present harm to children, and failed to considered future harm). See also, Matter of Monreal-Aguinaga, 23 I. & N. Dec. 56, 61 (BIA 2001) (en banc) ("[W]e do not find that an unconscionable standard is an appropriate one to apply in evaluating a respondent's eligibility for cancellation of removal under section 240A(b) of the Act."); Matter of Recinas, 23 I. & N. Dec.

Gertsenshteyn v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 137 (2d Cir. Sept. 25, 2008) ("When the BIA has adopted the IJ's reasoning and offered additional commentary, we review the decision of the IJ as supplemented by the BIA. Wala, 511 F.3d at 105. Additionally, when our jurisdiction depends on the definition of a phrase used in the INA, and "when the intent of Congress is unclear and the agency's interpretation is reasonable," we accord the BIA's determination the deference mandated by the Supreme Court's decision in Chevron. Mugalli, 258 F.3d at 55 (internal quotation marks omitted).

Gertsenshteyn v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 137 (2d Cir. Sept. 25, 2008) ("We have adopted a "categorical approach" to deciding whether a crime of conviction fits within the definition of "aggravated felony" in 1101(a)(43), thereby rendering an alien removable under 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). Santos v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 323, 325 (2d Cir.2006) (per curiam). Under this approach, which is sometimes called the Taylor-Shepard approach, after Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990), and Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S.

Mukasey v. Diouf, 542 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. Sept. 18, 2008) (90-day clock for Immigration Authorities to remove noncitizen starts only after the final date the DHS can show documented evidence of obstruction by the noncitizen of the removal process).