FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8628057
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Lal v. Gonzales

No. 8628057 · Decided January 17, 2007
No. 8628057 · Ninth Circuit · 2007 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
January 17, 2007
Citation
No. 8628057
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM ** Sarup Lai, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. In his opening brief, Lai fails to address, and therefore has waived any challenge to, the BIA’s denial of his motion to reopen as untimely. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259 (9th Cir.1996). We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s underlying order dismissing Lai’s direct appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture because the instant petition is not timely as to that order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b)(1); Membreno v. Gonzales, 425 F.3d 1227, 1229 (9th Cir.2005). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM ** Sarup Lai, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM ** Sarup Lai, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Lal v. Gonzales in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on January 17, 2007.
Use the citation No. 8628057 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →