Zayets v. Atty Gen USA

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Zayets v. Atty Gen USA

Opinion

Opinions of the United 2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

1-31-2005

Zayets v. Atty Gen USA Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 03-4398

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005

Recommended Citation "Zayets v. Atty Gen USA" (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 1547. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/1547

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

January 28, 2005

No. 03-4398 Sergey Zayets, Petitioner v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General United States (BIA No. A73-054-920)

Present: Ambro, Van Antw erpen, Circuit Judges and Shadur, District Judge

1) Motion by Petitioner to Amend or Revise the Court’s Opinion of December 30, 2004.

/s/ Shannon L. Craven Judgement and Opinion filed 12/30/04. Case Manager 267-299-4959 ORDER The foregoing Motion to Amend or Revise the Court’s Opinion of December 30, 2004 is hereby granted. The second sentence in the sixth paragraph of the opinion will be revised to read, as follows: “In that motion, Petitioner alleged that he had not learned until “early 2002” that his appeal to the BIA from the IJ’s original decision had been dismissed.” The fourth sentence in footnote 1 of the opinion will be revised to read, as follows: “Even if it were, and even if § 240(c)(6)(A) were subject to equitable tolling, it is likely that Petitioner could have enjoyed such tolling only through “early 2002,” when he learned of his dismissed appeal and one would presume that he should have learned of the related alleged misconduct of his attorney.”

By the Court,

/s/ Franklin S. Van Antwerpen Circuit Judge

Dated: January 31, 2005

Reference

Status
Unpublished