Guinto v. Rosenberg
| Decision Date | 13 July 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 26004.,26004. |
| Citation | 446 F.2d 11 |
| Parties | Eugenio Reyes GUINTO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George K. ROSENBERG, District Director Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Arthur D. Cohen (argued), of Kwan, Cohen & Quan, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner-appellant.
Dzintra I. Janavs, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., Steve Suffin, for I.N. S., San Francisco, Cal., for respondent-appellee.
Before DUNIWAY, WRIGHT and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges.
This case had its genesis in Guinto v. District Director, I&NS, C.D.Cal., 1969, 303 F.Supp. 1094, where the background facts are fully stated. In that case, Judge Hill, on July 11, 1969, remanded the matter to the Immigration and Naturalization Service for further proceedings. He held that the Attorney General (i. e., the Service) would be expected to determine whether Guinto was a member of the professions, eligible for third preference visa classification as a teacher under 8 U.S.C. § 1153(a) (3), and that the Secretary of Labor would be expected to determine whether to make the certification required by 8 U. S.C. § 1182(a) (14). The government filed a notice of appeal on September 8, 1969. Thereafter, it obtained two successive 30-day extensions of time to designate the record, the Solicitor General not having made a final determination to proceed with the appeal. On November 6, 1969, the Solicitor General having decided not to proceed, the appeal was dismissed by stipulation.
On December 11, 1969, the District Director asked Guinto for a letter from his employer, stating his occupation, title and describing his duties and responsibilities. No response was received. Also on December 11, 1969, the District Director asked the Department of Labor to consider certification as to the availability "of persons with similar educational preparation and experience to Guinto's who are able, willing and qualified as teachers in the area of intended employment." On February 12, 1970, the Department responded, saying:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Maceren v. District Director, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Los Angeles, Cal.
...of Labor Interpreter Releases, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Feb. 4, 1970), No. 7 (Feb. 20, 1970), No. 10 (Mar. 25, 1970). See also Guinto v. Rosenberg, 446 F.2d 11 (9th Cir. 1971). ...
-
Sun Il Yoo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
...in recognizing that Yoo had given correct information in his application. The INS argues that under our decision in Guinto v. Rosenberg, 446 F.2d 11 (9th Cir. 1971), the Service's procrastination does not estop the Government from denying Yoo the benefit of pre-certification in the consider......
-
Shon Ning Lee v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
...Naturalization Service v. Hibi, 414 U.S. 5, 94 S.Ct. 19, 38 L.Ed.2d 7 (1973), or that delay was willful or oppressive, Guinto v. Rosenberg, 446 F.2d 11 (9th Cir. 1971). Lee cannot rely on Sun Il Yoo v. Immigration & Naturalization Service,534 F.2d 1325 (9th Cir. 1976). In that case, the INS......
-
Carino v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 71-1376.
...their petitions, during which conditions changed markedly, constitutes a denial of due process. They would distinguish Guinto v. Rosenberg, 9 Cir., 1971, 446 F.2d 11, 12, on which respondent relies, on the ground that in that case the Court found no evidence that the change in circumstances......