# Lin Guo Xi v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, Opinion

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · August 1, 2002 · 298 F.3d 832

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9495218

## Case

- **Full name:** Lin Guo XI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Opinion, Respondent-Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** August 1, 2002
- **Citations:** 298 F.3d 832; 2002 Daily Journal DAR 8672; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6884; 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 15413; 2002 WL 1766307
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Gould
- **Judges:** Rymer, McKeown, Gould
- **Cited by:** 98 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9495218

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that, because the statute at issue does not make exceptions for inadmissible aliens and the Supreme Court has interpreted that statute to prohibit indefinite detentions without qualification, the protections of Zadvydas must apply to inadmissible aliens
- explaining that the statute interpreted in Barrera-Echavarria "no longer exists" and that the statute now applicable is 8 U.S.C. § l231(a)(6)
- noting a “statutory duty to effect the physical removal of individuals ordered removed within the statutorily specified 90-day ‘removal period’”

## Opinion text

GOULD, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I join noting that the basis for relief here is solely statutory, what Congress has ordained, and that we have no occasion in this case to address whether aliens in the position of Lin have any assertable constitutional protections.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9495218. Public record. Not legal advice.