96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2042, 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3456 Pao Yang Ying Yang Jimmy Yang Bao Yang Seyar Yang Phonesavanne Yang v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Good Law
79 F.3d 932
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 27, 199694-70439California4,686 words

Opinion

Opinion

79 F.3d 932 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2042 , 96 Daily Journal D.A.R. 3456 Pao YANG; Ying Yang; Jimmy Yang; Bao Yang; Seyar Yang; Phonesavanne Yang, Petitioners, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. No. 94-70439. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 7, 1995. Decided March 27, 1996. Donald L. Ungar, Simmons, Ungar, Helbush, Steinberg & Bright, San Francisco, California, for petitioners. Alison R. Drucker and Patricia Connally, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. Petition to Review a Decision of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Before: BROWNING, CANBY and HALL, Circuit Judges. CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judge: 1 The petitioners were denied asylum in the United States under a regulation which categorically precludes asylum for refugees who have "firmly resettled" in another country. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.14 (c)(2) (1994). 1 They argue that the regulation is ultra vires, and ask us to remand their cause to the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") for consideration on the merits. We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 8…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.