Cynthia Asuncion v. George K. Rosenberg, District Director, United States Immigration and Naturalization Service , 429 F.2d 1324 ( 1970 )
Menu:
-
429 F.2d 1324
Cynthia ASUNCION, Petitioner,
v.
George K. ROSENBERG, District Director, United States
Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent.No. 26035.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
June 26, 1970.
Arthur D. Cohen, of Kwan, Cohen & Quan, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner.
Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., David H. Anderson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent.
Before HAMLEY and TRASK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
1On June 22, 1970, petitioner moved in this court for an order restraining respondent and his agents and employees from deporting petitioner from the United States pending the final determination of petitioner's motion, filed with the Board of Immigration Appeals on June 19, 1970, to consider an application for voluntary departure and for stay of deportation pending decision.
2On the day this motion was made, another judge of this court entered an order restraining respondent, his agents, employees and representatives, from deporting petitioner from the United States '* * * for a period of 7 days to and including June 29, 1970, or until further order of this Court.' No response to the motion has been received from respondent.
3In view of the wording of the ex parte order entered on June 22, 1970, that restraining order will not be in effect after June 29, 1970. But since petitioner's motion is for a restraining order extending beyond that date, it is the court's view that she is entitled to an explicit ruling, before June 29, 1970, as to whether a restraining order extending beyond that date will be granted.
4Petitioner invokes Fed.R.App.P. 18, which is applicable where it is sought to stay a decision or order of an agency 'pending direct review in the court of appeals.'
5On June 2, 1970, this court entered its opinion affirming a summary judgment for respondent in the underlying deportation proceeding. 427 F.2d 523. No petition for rehearing was filed and petitioner has not sought a stay of mandate pending the filing and consideration of a petition for certiorari. Nothing is now pending before this court concerning which the requested restraining order would be pertinent, within the meaning of the rule referred to above.
6We therefore conclude that respondent should not be restrained beyond June 29, 1970, from deporting petitioner. It is so ordered.
Document Info
Docket Number: 26035_1
Citation Numbers: 429 F.2d 1324, 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8479
Judges: Hamley, Per Curiam, Trask
Filed Date: 6/26/1970
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024