Court Opinion

ID: 277950
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2011-08-23 08:43:03+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:31.858249
License: Public Domain

386 F.2d 191
Ronald J. ARRIAS, Petitioner,v.THE IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 21054.
United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.
Nov. 28, 1967.

Lloyd A. Tasoff (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Cecil F. Poole, U.S. Atty., Charles Elmer Collett (argued), Asst. U.S. Atty., Steve Suffin, Atty., INS, San Francisco, Cal., Joseph Sureck, Regional Counsel, INS, San Pedro, Cal., Ramsey Clark, Atty. Gen. of U.S., Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Before HAMLEY, BROWNING and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

1
The Immigration and Naturalization Service is hereby substituted as party respondent in place of the State of California and the United States of America (see Immigration and Nationality Act 106(a)(3), 8 U.S.C. 1105a(a)(3)).  The petition must be dismissed because the petitioner has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as required by section 106(c).  Rodriguez-De Leon v. I.N.S., 9 Cir., 1963, 324 F.2d 311; Murillo-Aguilera v. I.N.S., 9 Cir., 1963, 313 F.2d 141; Mai Kai Fong v. I.N.S., 9 Cir., 1962, 305 F.2d 239; Siaba-Fernandez v. Rosenberg, 9 Cir., 1962, 302 F.2d 139.

2
Dismissed.