RODRIGUEZ-ROMERO

v.

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• United States v. Cleophas James Kearney, 560 F.2d 1358 (9th Cir. 1977)
  …. It has been suggested that the existing rule be re-examined and abandoned, citing California’s analysis and rejection of the rule as rightly reasoned. United States v. Vaught, 434 F. 2d 124, 125 (9th Cir. 1970) (Ely, J., concurring), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 976, 91 S.Ct. 1197, 28 L.Ed.2d 326 (1971), citing In re Romano, 64 Cal.2d 826, 51 Cal.Rptr. 910, 415 P. 2d 798 (1966), & Cal.Penal Code § 654 (West 1957). A later holding, while noting the reservations expressed in Vaught, adhered to the rule of separ…
• Hanes Corp. v. Julien Millard, 531 F.2d 585 (D.C. Cir. 1976)
  …57-60 (1967). And if, partly for these reasons, an arbitration panel were to determine that the issues of patent law were not arbitrable, cf. Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. Technical Development Corp., 433 F. 2d 55, 63 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 976, 91 S.Ct. 1199, 28 L.Ed.2d 326 (1971); Leesona Corp. v. Cotwool Mfg. Corp., 204 F.Supp. 141, 143 [*594] (W.D.S.C.1962), aff’d, 315 F. 2d 538 (4th Cir. 1963); Zip Mfg. Co. v. Pep Mfg. Co., 44 F. 2d 184, 186 (D.Del.1930), it is possible that the next…
• Clarance B. Dickinson v. Heinold Sec., Inc., 661 F.2d 638 (7th Cir. 1981)
  …on here. . For other instances in which federal statutory causes of action have been exempted from pre-dispute arbitration agreements, see, e. g., Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. Technical Development Corp., 433 F. 2d 55 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 976, 91 S.Ct. 1199, 28 L.Ed.2d 326 (1971) (patent claims); Applied Digital Technology, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co., 576 F. 2d 116, 117 (7th Cir. 1978) (antitrust claims); Allegaert v. Perot, 548 F. 2d 432, 437 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 910,…