The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
052323po-pdf•Yogeswaran Kumarasamy v. Attorney General of United States
052323po-pdfCourt of Appeals for the Third CircuitJun 23, 2006
* The Honorable A. Wallace Tashima, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 05-2323
YOGESWARAN KUMARASAMY,
Appellant
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES;
SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; JOHN CARBONE,
Field Office Director, Immigration & Customs Enforcement; VENSON DAVID, Agent,
Immigration & Customs Enforcement; BOB,
Agent, Immigration & Customs Enforcement
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
D.C. Civil No. 04-cv-02341
District Judge: The Honorable William G. Bassler
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
May 11, 2006
Before: BARRY, SMITH and TASHIMA, * Circuit Judges
ORDER AMENDING OPINION
IT IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above case, filed June 23, 2006, be
amended as follows:
Delete the following sentence found in the first full paragraph on page 5 which
-- 1 of 2 --
5 In the REAL ID Act, Congress amended both 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(b)(9) and (g) to
make clear that these provisions preclude any habeas corpus review over certain removal-
related claims. See REAL ID Act §§ 106(a)(2) & (3). Thus, if an alien challenges an
action taken or a proceeding brought to remove him, it would appear that 8 U.S.C. §§
1252(b)(9) and (g), as amended by the REAL ID Act, would preclude habeas review over
that challenge. We need not reach the question of whether §§ 1252(b)(9) and (g) apply in
this case because we conclude that the District Court lacked jurisdiction on the separate
ground that Kumarasamy was not in “custody” at the time he filed his habeas petition.
See infra.
reads:
“The REAL ID Act applies, by its own terms, only to cases in which the
petitioner seeks review of a final order of removal.”
and replace with:
“Under the REAL ID Act, by its own terms, we have jurisdiction only in
those cases in which the petitioner seeks review of a final order of
removal.5”
By the Court,
/s/ Maryanne Trump Barry
Circuit Judge
Dated: August 4, 2006
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.