Skip to main content

Pruidze v. Holder, 632 F.3d 234, 235-41 (6th Cir. 2011)

Case Conclusion Date: 02.03.2011

Practice Area: Immigration

Outcome: Granted (we were successful) landmark case

Description: Landmark case. The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that The Board of Immigration Appeals interprets a regulation promulgated by the Attorney General to provide that the Board lacks jurisdiction to review a motion to reopen once an alien leaves the United States, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Yet the statute that empowers the Board to consider motions to reopen says nothing about jurisdictional limitations of any kind, let alone this kind. Because this regulatory interpretation has no roots in any statutory source and misapprehends the authority delegated to the Board by Congress, the Board’s order disclaiming power to consider the motion to reopen filed by Vakhtang Pruidze must be vacated. Pruidze v. Holder, 632 F.3d 234, 235-41 (6th Cir. 2011)

See all Legal Cases