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Gonzales U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 14-1510 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis [UNPUBLISHED] [Per Curiam - Before Bye, Smith and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing.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 unreasonable.