Raj Patel

Correspondent

Raj Patel

Breaking news correspondent, covers late-night developments and emergency rulings.

Immigration & Government

Decisions covered by Raj Patel

873 decisions
Jun 3 2026
9th Cir. 25-2988 Unpublished

Pena Estrada v. Blanche

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying asylum. The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice from an Immigration Judge's adverse credibility determination based on a cold transcript.

Jun 3 2026
9th Cir. 24-4790 Unanimous

Lnu v. Blanche

The Ninth Circuit imposed sanctions on two attorneys for filing briefs containing fabricated cases and misattributed quotations resulting from generative AI hallucinations, compounded by a failure to disclose the true source of the errors.

Jun 2 2026
9th Cir. 24-5510 Unpublished

Martinez-Quihuis v. Blanche

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order. The court found substantial evidence supported the agency's determination that the petitioner failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to qualifying relatives.

Jun 2 2026
9th Cir. 25-3636 Unpublished

Pascal v. Blanche

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order. The court found substantial evidence supported the denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture.

Jun 2 2026
Fed. Cir. 25-1328 Panel Decision

Robison v. Collins

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal filed by a veteran's survivor challenging a denial of a clear and unmistakable error claim. The court held that the survivor lacked standing to bring such a claim under established precedent.

Jun 2 2026
9th Cir. 2:25-cv-00054-DLC Unpublished

LIGHTHISER, ET AL. V. TRUMP, ET AL.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit challenging three executive orders on energy policy. The court held that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because their alleged injuries were too speculative and the requested relief was beyond the power of the federal courts.