Jose A. Cabranes
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Accordingly, we deny the petition for review and affirm the denial of petitioner's application for asylum and withholding of removal.”
“Because the arguments appellants assert on this appeal have been waived, plaintiff's motion to dismiss the appeal is GRANTED.”
“We have carefully considered defendant's remaining arguments and find each of them to be without merit. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the judgment of the District Court is hereby Affirmed.”
“Accordingly, the decision of the Tax Court is Affirmed.”
“Judge Robinson effectively denied plaintiff's motion for leave to amend her complaint when he adopted Magistrate Judge Yanthis's Report and Recommendation proposing dismissal of the action and entered final judgment in favor of defendants. We affirm.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is GRANTED. As we have completed our review, the pending motion for a stay of removal in this petition is DISMISSED as moot.”
“We hold that nothing in the Supreme Court's jurisprudence or prior decisions of our Court expressly imposes a fiduciary-duty requirement on the ordinary meaning of "deceptive" where the alleged fraud is an affirmative misrepresentation rather than a nondisclosure. Vacated and remanded.”
“As explained in further detail below, we conclude that this evidence was sufficient to meet Sassaman's minimal burden of establishing a prima facie case of sex discrimination in violation of Title VII.”
“Accordingly, based on the New York Court of Appeals' answer to our certified question, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court and remand the cause to the District Court to enter judgment in conformity with the parties' settlement agreement.”
“We hold that the meaning of "arbitration" under the Federal Arbitration Act is governed by federal common law -- not state law. ... Accordingly, we AFFIRM the September 28, 2011 judgment of the District Court.”
“We hold that there has been no such "rescheduling" of marijuana. ... Marijuana remains classified as a Schedule I substance. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the District Court.”
Put Judge Cabranes's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Cabranes actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Cabranes's own signed orders and cites them.