Case law

Mei Yan Chen v. Attorney General USA

393 F. App'x 941 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 10, 2010

to clearly erroneous review as to the facts and de novo review as to 8 the law. … The BIA must accept the IJ’s factual findings, unless it determines that those findings are clearly erroneous.5 (R. at 87.)

Bancohio National Bank, Joseph E. And Dola Ann Davis, Defendants-Third Party v. Small Business Administration, Third-Party

820 F.2d 405 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 9, 1987

I. 5 The SBA is authorized to participate in three different ways with persons seeking loans for qualifying small businesses. … SBA shall not be deemed to be a coguarantor with any other guarantors. 10 The SBA has clearly anticipated a contention such as is advanced here by Davis and provided by regulation against it.

Tong Jing Chen v. Attorney General

204 F. App'x 122 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 7, 2006

An alien may qualify for political asylum if he or she can demonstrate past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or … Withholding of removal requires the 3 applicant to establish a clear probability of persecution in the proposed country of deportation. Gabuniya v.

United States v. Juan Hernandez-Bourdier

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 22, 2021

The District Court found that Hernandez-Bourdier did not qualify for “safety-valve” relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) because he had not truthfully shared all information at sentencing. … The District Court’s conclusion was not clearly erroneous, so we affirm the sentence. IV.

Sharma v. Atty Gen USA

57 F. App'x 998 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 27, 2003

As the [INS] points out, section 101(a)(43)(M)(i) 3 Their conspiracy convictions will not qualify as aggravated felonies if the underlying substantive convictions do not qualify. … When the statutory language at issue is unambiguous, a court must effectuate Congress’s clearly expressed intent. Valansi, 278 F.3d at 209.

Courson v. Bert Bell NFL Player Retirement Plan

214 F.3d 136 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 31, 2000

He contends that the record establishes that he was totally and permanently disabled during this period due to alcoholism. … First of all, a prerequisite to qualifying for "Active Nonfootball" benefits is that the disability did not result from"League football activities."

Diabate v. Attorney General

206 F. App'x 166 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 27, 2006

The respondent testified very clearly that he was released with the understanding he was not going to be involved in politics. That is one of the reasons he believes he was released. … “Thus, if an alien fails to establish the well-founded fear of persecution required for a grant of asylum, he or she will, by definition, have failed to establish the clear probability of persecution” needed to qualify

Xue v. Atty Gen USA

93 F. App'x 380 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 15, 2004

. § 1158(a)(3) clearly deprives us of jurisdiction to review an IJ’s determination that an asylum petition was not filed within the one year limitations period, and that such period was not tolled by extraordinary circumstances … To qualify for this mandatory relief, an applicant “must show a clear probability that his life or freedom would be threatened” because of one of the enumerated grounds. Lin v.

Ugbome v. Attorney General

195 F. App'x 106 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 13, 2006

The IJ concluded that Ugbome had failed to meet her burden to qualify for asylum, withholding of removal or relief under the CAT and accordingly ordered her removed. … While it is reasonable to expect corroboration for Ugbome’s marriage and her husband’s connection with NDYM – clearly central to Ugbome’s claim – and the Real ID Act of 2005 makes it clear that an IJ’s conclusion as to

City of New Brunswick v. Borough of Milltown and the Middlesex County Utilities Authority (Formerly Middlesex County Sewerage Authority), and the Middlesex County Utilities Authority (Formerly the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority) v. The United States of America, by and Through Its Environmental Protection Agency

686 F.2d 120 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 22, 1982

. §§ 1281-1297 , establishes a federal grant program under which the federal government will bear up to 75 percent of the construction cost of publicly-owned waste treatment plants, so long as certain conditions are met by … Second, while the MCUA has no control over Milltown, it could simply refuse to accept New Brunswick's sewage, and so qualify for federal funds (at least insofar as the EPA's objections to Milltown's failure to adopt a user

United States v. Fletcher Williams

631 F.2d 198 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 23, 1980

The record clearly indicates that Williams requested several times that the affidavits be used in his defense. Williams first showed his counsel the affidavits in December 1977. … The duty of counsel to investigate the facts in preparing a defense is well-established. In Moore v.

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Ward Trucking Corp.

48 F.3d 742 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 24, 1995

Congress immunized from all forms of appellate review any remand order issued on the grounds specified in § 1447(c), whether or not that order might be deemed erroneous by an appellate court. … At the outset, however, in order to address the specific reviewability issue presented here and determine which of our cases speak most clearly to the issue, we must decide the precise nature of the district court’s May 9

Dewey v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft

681 F.3d 170 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 31, 2012

America, Inc., Audi of America, Inc., and related entities (collectively, “Volkswagen”).1 As part of the settlement, one group of class members (the “reimbursement group”) received the right to reimbursement for certain qualifying … The problem with dividing the class without having any representation from one of the groups becomes clearly untenable in this case because of who drew the line.

Rainey v. Secretary Pennsylvania DePartment of Corrections

658 F. App'x 142 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 27, 2016

Ct. at 45 (“The Third Circuit thus correctly held that Gray was not ‘clearly established Federal law’ against which it could measure the Pennsylvania Superior Court’s decision.”). … We therefore conclude that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was unreasonable in concluding that the use of Williams’s statement here was not a violation of Rainey’s clearly established Confrontation Clause rights.

Joan Orie Melvin v. District Attorney Allegheny Co

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 14, 2020

On federal habeas review of Orie Melvin’s state convictions, we defer to the Pennsylvania Superior Court and will uphold its decisions unless they are “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established … And she did not have immunity from criminal prosecution because of her occupation as a judge. 6  In all, Orie Melvin’s arguments do not satisfy her high habeas burden

Keystone Chapter, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., in Representation of Its Members v. Thomas P. Foley, in His Official Capacity as the Secretary of Labor and Industry for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania State Building and Construction Trades Council (Amicus in District Court). Thomas P. Foley, in No. 93-7547. Keystone Chapter, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., in Representation of Its Members, in No. 93-7573. Bell Telephone Company of Pennsylvania Communications Workers of America, Afl-Cio, District 13 v. Thomas P. Foley in His Official Capacity as Secretary of Labor and Industry for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania James R. Davis Frayda Kamber Richard W. Martz John H. Mickens. Pennsylvania State Building and Construction Trades Council, Afl-Cio (Amicus in District Court). Thomas P. Foley James R. Davis Frayda Kamber Richard W. Martz John H. Mickens

37 F.3d 945 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 19, 1994

NLRA. 10 They claimed their participation in public works projects was impeded because their collective bargaining agreements, which include centrally administered benefits plans for workers in several states, would not qualify … In applying the Prevailing Wage Act, Pennsylvania is clearly acting with an "interest in setting policy," not as a proprietor. Id. --- U.S. at ----, 113 S.Ct. at 1197 .

United States v. Atrium I Nursing

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 2008

Further, Atrium was a qualifying “health care benefit program” because it was receiving funds under Medicare and Medicaid, and Whipkey’s false statements obviously related to care given – or not given – by Atrium. … The Court concluded that Bell thus “failed to establish that” the correspondence between herself and Senator Santorum was “suppressed within the meaning of Brady,” and she, “therefore, failed to establish a Brady violation

Professional Insurance Management v. Ohio Casualty Group of Insurance Companies (In re Professional Insurance Management)

285 F.3d 268 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 1, 2002

This initial termination letter was followed by an “official form letter” dated November 19, 1993 establishing the procedures for termination and renewals. … To aid in this interpretation, we turn first to general rules of statutory construction established by the United States Supreme Court.

United States v. Bell

282 F. App'x 184 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 6, 2008

Further, Atrium was a qualifying “health care benefit program” because it was receiving funds under Medicare and Medicaid, and Whipkey’s false statements obviously related to care given – or not given – by Atrium. … The Court concluded that Bell thus “failed to establish that” the correspondence between herself and Senator Santorum was “suppressed within the meaning of Brady,” and she, “therefore, failed to establish a Brady violation

Irwin Shapiro v. Ujb Financial Corp.

964 F.2d 272 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 7, 1992

We also note that plaintiffs in future cases of this kind should plead clearly and coherently from the outset. 2. … This allegation is clearly inactionable puffing. Moreover, many allegations refer to defendants' statements about specific figures.