ANDERSON ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; BRANDIS ET AL. V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; BURGARD V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; CONROY V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; DELUTRI V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; ELLIS ET AL. V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; LYDON V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; MURPHY V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; PIORKOWSKI V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; ROMASHKO V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; AND TOEPFER V. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Citator

Cited By

• Mariusz Kaczmarczyk v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 933 F.2d 588 (7th Cir. 1991)
  …ly supersedes the hearing provisions of that Act.”). Because asylum proceedings initiated in the context of the deportation process are considered part and parcel of that process, see Kashani v. Nelson, 793 F. 2d 818, 821 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1006, 107 S.Ct. 644, 93 L.Ed.2d 701 (1986), Carvajal-Munoz, 743 F. 2d at 567, the APA’s procedural entitlements are not applicable to the proceedings before us.6 We turn, then, to the constitutional component of the petitioners’ argument, which is that…
• Ayuda, Inc. v. Thornburgh, 880 F.2d 1325 (D.C. Cir. 1989)
  …n. 2 (opinion of Silberman, J.) (assuming without deciding that an alien could sue to gain direct review of a denial of asylum without waiting for a deportation proceeding); but see Kashani v. Nelson, 793 F. 2d 818, 826-27 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1006, 107 S.Ct. 644, 93 L.Ed.2d 701 (1986).13 [*1338] IRCA, however, provides for an alien to seek review of a denial of legalization only in the context of a deportation proceeding, see 8 U.S.C. § 1255a(f)(4)(A) (Supp. V 1987), so we are not confronted…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Dodson v. Colonel Gordon N. Zelez, 917 F.2d 1250 (10th Cir. 1990)
  …ourt of Military Appeals then affirmed the conviction. See United States v. Dodson, 21 M.J. 237 (C.M.A.1986), on rehearing, 22 M.J. 257 (C.M.A.1986). The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari on December 8, 1986. See Dodson v. United States, 479 U.S. 1006, 107 S.Ct. 644, 93 L.Ed.2d 701 (1986). On June 30, 1987, defendant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court. After fully reviewing the voting procedures claim and refusing to review the other three suggestions of error, th…