GIOVA

v.

ROSENBERG, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Citator

Cited By (73 total)

• Woodby v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 385 U.S. 276 (U.S. 1966)
  …” and 5 U. S. C. § 1006 limits the agencies to acting on “reliable, probative, and [*289] substantial evidence.” This pattern has traditionally been held satisfied when the agency decides on the preponderance of the evidence. In Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U. S. 18, this Court held only that denial of a petition to reopen or reconsider is reviewable. The Court did not specify the scope of review to be applied. The Court may be depending upon a concession by the Government on this point, but it is clear that ju…
• Cheng Fan Kwok v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 392 U.S. 206 (U.S. 1968)
  …nquiry officer, and reviewable together by the Board of Immigration Appeals . . . are . . . included within the ambit of the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals under § 106 (a).” 375 U. S., at 229. In the second case, Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U. S. 18, petitioner moved before the Board of Immigration Appeals to reopen proceedings, previously conducted under § 242 (b), that had terminated in an order for his deportation. The Board denied relief. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded…
• Interstate Commerce Comm'n v. Bhd. of Locomotive Eng'rs, 482 U.S. 270 (U.S. 1987)
  …does not give us the power to rewrite the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations. Nor does it justify ignoring this Court’s decisions explicitly holding that a denial of a petition for reopening is reviewable, see Giova v. Rosenberg, 379 U. S. 18 (1964); reversing an agency for failing to reopen a [*292] matter, see Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. United States, 284 U. S. 248 (1932);6 or reviewing denials of petitions for reopening, see, e. g., Radio Corporation of America v. United States,…