Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Fong Choi Yu v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Fong Choi Yu v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 439 F.2d 719 (9th Cir. 1971)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1971-04-01
Topic: general

PER CURIAM: Petitioner seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying suspension of petitioner’s deportation, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1254(a) (D- No abuse of discretion in denying suspension appears on the record. Proof of a petitioner’s eligibility for suspension does not compel the granting of that relief. (United States ex rel. Hintopoulos v. Shaughnessy (1957) 353 U.S. 72, 77 S.Ct. 618, 1 L.Ed.2d 652; MacKay v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Fong Choi Yu v. Immigration and Naturalization Service. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 12 opinions

FONG CHOI YU v. IMMIGRATION NATURALIZATION,439 F.2d 719(9th Cir. 1971)

FONG CHOI YU, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

Respondent.

No. 26615.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

April 1, 1971.

Joseph S. Hertogs, of Jackson Hertogs, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.

James L. Browning, Jr., U.S. Atty., David R. Urdan, Chief Asst. U.S. Atty., Stephen M. Suffin, Atty., I.N.S., San Francisco, Cal., John N. Mitchell, U.S. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., for respondent.

Before MERRILL, HUFSTEDLER, and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner seeks review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals denying suspension of petitioner's deportation, pursuant to8 U.S.C. § 1254(a)(1).

No abuse of discretion in denying suspension appears on the record. Proof of a petitioner's eligibility for suspension does not compel the granting of that relief. (United States ex rel. Hintopoulos v. Shaughnessy (1957)353 U.S. 72, 77 S.Ct. 618, 1 L.Ed.2d 652; MacKay v. McAlexander (9th Cir. 1959)268 F.2d 35, 40.) That petitioner would suffer economic hardship from deportation is insufficient to require an exercise of the Board's discretion in petitioner's favor. (Llacer v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (9th Cir. 1968)388 F.2d 681.)

The petition to review is denied, and the order of the Board is affirmed.Page 720