Zhang v. Holder, No. 09-2628, concerned a petition for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing petitioner's appeal of an Immigration Judge's order, which terminated his reopened removal proceedings on the basis that he had already been removed from the U.S. The court denied the petition, holding that the BIA was entitled to deference regarding its interpretation of the regulation governing motions to reopen.
In US v. Kumar, No. 06-5482, the court affirmed in part defendants' convictions and sentences for conspiracy, securities and wire fraud, obstruction of justice, and perjury, holding that 1) regardless of whether defendant's false testimony violated 18 U.S.C. section 1512(c)(2), it plainly violated section 1503(a), and the indictment charged at least that offense; 2) the Fifth Amendment did not protect false testimony; and 3) application of the 2005 Guidelines to defendants' fraud offenses, which were completed in 2000, did not violate the Ex Post Facto clause. However, the court vacated one defendant's sentence on the ground that the district court erroneously failed to award defendant a two-point reduction for acceptance of responsibility that he should have received.