Case: 22-60074 Document: 00516734333 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED May 2, 2023 No. 22-60074 Lyle W. Cayce ____________ Clerk Jose Rangel Perez, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. ______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A098 355 522 ______________________________ Before Elrod, Ho, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Jennifer Walker Elrod, Circuit Judge: Jose Rangel Perez has been ordered removed from the United States to Mexico. Perez concedes that he is removable but seeks cancellation of removal based on the hardship his removal would cause his family. An Immigration Judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals denied Perez’s application for cancellation, and Perez now petitions this court for review. Perez’s challenge is twofold. First, he contends that the IJ and the BIA failed to use the proper legal standard to assess his eligibility for discretionary relief. Second, he argues that the BIA erred by failing to Case: 22-60074 Document: 00516734333 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2023 No. 22-60074 remand his case to the IJ for consideration of new evidence as well as a potential grant of voluntary departure. Binding circuit precedent requires us to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. I Jose Rangel Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States on an unknown date. In 2011 he was charged with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) for being an alien present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled by an immigration officer. He conceded removability as charged. Perez then filed an application for cancellation of removal based on the hardship his removal would cause his wife and three minor daughters, all of whom are United States citizens. He submitted supporting documentation, including medical records relating to his own health and that of his youngest daughter, who suffers from asthma. The IJ held a hearing on his application, at which Perez and his wife provided the sole testimony. The IJ did not take issue with Perez’s characterization of the hardship his family would face upon his removal. To the contrary, the IJ found Perez and his wife credible and accepted their description of the facts. The IJ nevertheless denied Perez’s application, concluding that “the hardship to [Perez’s] qualifying relatives does not satisfy the high standard of hardship required.” Perez appealed to the BIA, arguing that the IJ applied the wrong legal standard in evaluating whether the facts presented amounted to undue hardship. He also presented newly available evidence that his wife was pregnant with their fourth child and that his middle daughter was being treated for ADHD, evaluated for speech deficiencies, and placed in special education classes. 2 Case: 22-60074 Document: 00516734333 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/02/2023 No. 22-60074 The BIA dismissed the appeal after adopting and affirming the IJ’s decision. With respect to Perez’s new evidence, the BIA concluded that a remand was not warranted because the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals