DISCLAIMER:  The following unofficial case summaries are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.
132171P.pdf   10/27/2014  Ribelino Avendano  v.  Eric H. Holder, Jr.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-2171
   Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals    
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Shepherd and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Petition for Review - Immigration. The BIA permissibly categorized 
   petitioner's offense of making terroristic threats in violation of Minn. 
   Stat. Section 609.713 subd. 1 as a crime of moral turpitude and did not 
   err in concluding he was ineligible for cancellation of removal; the BIA's 
   determination whether petitioner presented sufficient grounds to reopen a 
   hearing for the purpose of determining whether he is eligible for asylum 
   and withholding of removal based on his fear of gang violence and 
   recruitment in El Salvador does not present a question of law or a 
   constitutional claim over which this court has jurisdiction. Judge Kelly, 
   concurring in part and dissenting in part. 
136034P.pdf   10/27/2014  Kathryn Nielsen  v.  ACS, Inc.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  13-6034
                          and No:  13-6035
   U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Council Bluffs    
   [PUBLISHED] [Schermer, Author, with Federman, Chief Judge, and Saladino, 
   Bankruptcy Judge] 
   Bankruptcy Appellate Panel. Bankruptcy court ruling denying debtor's 
   request to discharge her student loans under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 523(a)(8) is 
   affirmed as debtor failed to meet her burden of proving repayment would 
   create an undue hardship; the bankruptcy court properly considered the 
   availability of and the debtor's failure to enroll in an Income Contingent 
   Repayment Plan in its totality-of-the-circumstances analysis and could 
   reject debtor's position that she had not applied for repayment plans due 
   to possible tax consequences. 
141510U.pdf   10/27/2014  United States  v.  Samuel Gonzales
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-1510
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Smith and Kelly, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders. Defendant cannot challenge the 
   Guidelines calculations as he agreed to them in his plea agreement and 
   withdrew his objection to the one enhancement not covered by the 
   agreement; within-Guidelines-range sentence was not substantively 
   unreasonable; Eighth Amendment challenge to the length of the sentence 
   rejected as meritless. 
142408U.pdf   10/27/2014  United States  v.  Troy Clark
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-2408
   U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge    
   [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bye and Smith, Circuit Judges] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing. Within-Guidelines-range sentence imposed upon 
   the revocation of defendant's supervised release was not substantively