USCA11 Case: 20-14738 Date Filed: 06/03/2022 Page: 1 of 9 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-14738 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ BLANCA ARACELY LOVO DE PEREZ, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A209-854-084 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-14738 Date Filed: 06/03/2022 Page: 2 of 9 2 Opinion of the Court 20-14738 Before JILL PRYOR, LUCK, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Blanca Aracely Lovo de Perez seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming the Immigra- tion Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her application for cancellation of re- moval. She argues that the BIA applied an incorrect legal stand- ard when it found that she had not shown sufficient hardship to her U.S. citizen children to be eligible for cancellation of removal. She also argues that the BIA violated her minor children’s rights to substantive due process and equal protection under the Fifth Amendment when they were separated as a result of denying her relief. Because we find that both arguments lack merit, we dis- miss this petition in part and deny it in part. I. Lovo de Perez is a native and citizen of El Salvador who ar- rived in the United States without inspection at an unknown place and time. On February 3, 2020, the Department of Homeland Se- curity served her with a notice to appear, which charged that she was removable for being present without being admitted or pa- roled. 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(a)(i). She conceded removability but applied for cancellation of removal in April 2020. As the basis of her application, Lovo de Perez asserted that she had lived in the United States since 2003 and her removal would result in excep- USCA11 Case: 20-14738 Date Filed: 06/03/2022 Page: 3 of 9 20-14738 Opinion of the Court 3 tional and extremely unusual hardship to her two U.S. citizen children. At her hearing before an IJ, she testified that she entered the U.S. illegally in 2003 at the age of 24. She testified that she went to South Carolina, where she had lived ever since. She said that she worked in different jobs—construction, cleaning up trash, in restaurants, and cleaning houses—earning her a weekly income of around $300–$350. She testified that she separated from her husband in El Salvador and had not spoken to him since 2003. Lovo de Perez testified that she had four children, and three of them—two minor U.S. citizens and a 25-year-old Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) 1 recipient born in El Salvador— lived with her in South Carolina. At the time of the hearing, her minor children were 13 and 15 years old. She also testified that she had a boyfriend, Hector, in the United States for ten years. Hector did not have legal status, and they had no children togeth- er. She testified that they lived together and he helped to pay some …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals