Designated for publication Graves, J. (Graves, Ho, Duncan), Ho, J., concurring; immigration Denying Cambodian citizen’s petition for review of BIA order affirming IJ’s finding that he is removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony. The Court held “that Khan’s conviction under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3925(a) constitutes receipt of stolen property, and … More May 30, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Elrod, J. (Elrod, Ho, Wilson), immigration Dismissing Mexican citizen’s petition for review of BIA order denying cancellation of removal on the basis of hardship to his family. The Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to review a hardship determination. Unpublished per curiam (Ho, Oldham, Douglas), habeas corpus Dismissing for lack … More May 2, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Smith, J. (Smith, Clement, Wilson), criminal, supervised release, sentencing Vacating sentences for revocation of supervised release, and rendering judgment accordingly. Defendant had originally been sentenced to 20 years imprisonment and 5 years’ supervised release for a conviction of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The district court then vacated the … More April 28, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Clement, J. (Smith, Clement, Wilson), insurance Affirming summary judgment in favor of insurer on homeowners’ suit for coverage for mold-related losses. Unpublished per curiam (Jones, Haynes, Oldham), criminal, restitution Affirming denial of writ of coram nobis as a collateral attack on restitution order. per curiam (Stewart, Dennis, Willett), prisoner suit Affirming dismissal … More April 18, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Willett, J. (Graves, Willett, Engelhardt), insurance, preemption, sovereign immunity, standing Affirming dismissal of former federal employee’s claim against health insurer and federal Office of Personnel Management arising from the denial of coverage for proton therapy for cancer; district court had dismissed claims against OPM under sovereign immunity, and against Blue Cross on … More March 13-14, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Higginbotham, J. (Higginbotham, Higginson, Oldham), Oldham, J., dissenting in part; qualified immunity Dismissing for lack of appellate jurisdiction officers’ appeal of denial of qualified immunity summary judgment on plaintiff’s excessive force claim against one officer, false arrest claim against four officers, and fabrication of evidence claim against another officer, arising from the … More March 9-10, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication per curiam (Graves, Ho, Duncan), Duncan, J., concurring in judgment (joined by Ho, J.); criminal, supervised release After guilty plea to conviction of illegal reentry, with 27-month sentence, Court vacated supervised release condition that defendant self-deport if, after release from confinement, immigration officials decline to take custody of him and deport him. … More February 13, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Engelhardt, J. (Graves, Willett, Engelhardt), criminal, vagueness, timeliness, jurisdiction, Miranda rights Reversing judgment suppressing defendants’ statements made during an interview and dismissing counts against defendants arising from international bribery scheme, and remanding for further proceedings. The Court reversed the district court’s judgment that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction under the Foreign Corrupt Practices … More February 8, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Southwick, J. (Higginbotham, Southwick, Higginson), Texas Water Code, suretyship Affirming summary judgment in favor of surety on issue regarding whether private developers were entitled to offset for liquidated damages related to delay in completion of the projects, where offset was provided for by Texas Water Code for “district contract[s].” While a municipal … More January 12, 2023, opinions
Designated for publication Jones, J. (Jones, Stewart, Duncan), foreign discovery Reversing 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) order for foreign discovery, and remanding for further proceedings. The Court held that the district court “misconstrued our precedent and erroneously rebuffed respondents’ challenge” to a discovery order’s “validity pursuant to statutory requirements and the Supreme Court’s ‘Intel factors.’” (Citing … More December 13, 2022, opinions
