Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

MARMOLEJO v. MUKASEY, 519 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2008)

Armando MARMOLEJO-CAMPOS, aka Campos Ramos Armando, Petitioner, v.Michael B. MUKASEY, Att’y Gen., Respondent., 519 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2008)

Type: Opinion
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 2008-03-14
Topic: general

MARMOLEJO v. MUKASEY, 519 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2008) Armando MARMOLEJO-CAMPOS, aka Campos Ramos Armando, Petitioner, v.Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 04-76644.United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. March 14, 2008.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MARMOLEJO v. MUKASEY, 519 F.3d 907 (9th Cir. 2008). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MARMOLEJO v. MUKASEY,519 F.3d 907(9th Cir. 2008)

Armando MARMOLEJO-CAMPOS, aka Campos Ramos Armando, Petitioner, v.

Michael B. MUKASEY, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-76644.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

March 14, 2008.

Christopher J. Stender, Stender Pope, PC, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner.

Surell Brady, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, District Counsel, Office of the District Chief Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Phoenix, AZ, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.Page 908

ORDER

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge:

Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.