Source: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/content/perez-santana-v-holder-first-circuit
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 06:20:07+00:00

Document:
To date, seven courts of appeals have adopted arguments from our amicus briefs, and found that the regulatory departure bar conflicts with the statute. Perez Santana v. Holder, 731 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2013); Prestol Espinal v. Atty General of U.S., 653 F.3d 213 (3d Cir. 2011); William v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 329 (4th Cir. 2007); Ovalles v. Holder, 577 F.3d 288 (5th Cir. 2009); Pruidze v. Holder, 632 F.3d 234 (6th Cir. 2011); Reyes-Torres v. Holder, 645 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2011); Contreras-Bocanegra v. Holder, 629 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2010) (en banc). The amicus brief we filed in Perez-Santana v. Holder is representative of the briefs filed in other circuits.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.