Case Name: Bahman KHADJENOURI, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1972-05-11
Citations: 460 F.2d 461
Docket Number: No. 71-2190
Parties: Bahman KHADJENOURI, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
Judges: Before CHAMBERS and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and MURRAY, District Judge.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 460
Pages: 461–463

Head Matter:
Bahman KHADJENOURI, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 71-2190.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
May 11, 1972.
Allen R. Jackson (argued), of Jackson & Hertogs, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.
Steve Suffin (argued), INS, Richard L. Williams, Dist. Dir., INS, San Fran cisco, Cal., James L. Browning, Jr., U. S. Atty., William B. Spohn, Asst. U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., Joseph Surreck, Reg. Counsel INS, San Pedro, Cal., Henry E. Peterson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before CHAMBERS and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and MURRAY, District Judge.
Honorable W. D. Murray, Senior Judge, United States District Court, Butte, Montana, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
The decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying Khadjenouri's application for termination of deportation proceedings is affirmed.
We hold that Section 241(f) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1251(f) does not apply here. There is a difference between fraud after entry and fraud to obtain entry. Ferrante v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 399 F.2d 98 (6th Cir. 1968).
We are not convinced that the petitioner could never again obtain reentry.