NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-2637 ___________ DERON ODADA JOE, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A078-210-971) Immigration Judge: Alice Song Hartye ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) February 10, 2022 Before: KRAUSE, BIBAS and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: March 1, 2022) ___________ OPINION* ___________ PER CURIAM Deron Odada Joe, a citizen of Liberia, petitions for review of a final order of removal. For the following reasons, we will grant the petition in part, deny it in part, * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. dismiss it in part, and remand to the Board of Immigration Appeals for further proceedings. Joe was admitted to the United States in 1999 as a nonimmigrant visitor. In 2002, an Immigration Judge granted Joe’s application for asylum, and he later adjusted his status to lawful permanent resident. In 2019, a jury in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found Joe guilty of one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States, see 18 U.S.C. § 371, and eleven counts of aiding and assisting the filing of false tax returns, see 26 U.S.C. § 7206(2). Based on those convictions, the Government charged Joe with removability for having committed an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M) (offense that involves fraud or deceit involving loss to the victim over $10,000), and § 1101(a)(43)(U) (attempt or conspiracy to commit offense defined in § 1101(a)(43)). See 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). Joe, through counsel, contested his removability and applied for adjustment of status, a waiver of inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h), and asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). An Immigration Judge concluded that Joe was removable as charged and that he did not merit a favorable exercise of discretion as to his requests for adjustment of status and a waiver of inadmissibility under § 1182(h).1 In addition, the IJ found that Joe’s aggravated felony conviction rendered him ineligible for asylum. Although Joe was still eligible for withholding of removal and CAT protection, the IJ denied the application for 1 With respect to the request for a waiver of inadmissibility, the IJ also concluded that Joe failed to establish the requisite hardship to his relatives. 2 those forms of relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Joe’s appeal. The Board rejected Joe’s challenge to his removability, which was based in part on an argument the Government failed to establish that the losses to the victim exceeded $10,000. Further, the Board agreed that Joe did not merit a favorable exercise of discretion with respect to his requests for adjustment of status and a waiver of inadmissibility. In addition, the Board noted that Joe did not challenge the denial of asylum and withholding of removal. Finally, the Board found no error in the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals