Case: 21-60769 Document: 00516351568 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/09/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 9, 2022 No. 21-60769 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Francisco Esquivel-Muniz, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A089 936 769 Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Francisco Esquivel-Muniz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal from the denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Esquivel-Muniz contends that the BIA erred in determining that * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 21-60769 Document: 00516351568 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/09/2022 No. 21-60769 he failed to show that his removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his children and father and that he warrants voluntary departure. Although he also argues that the BIA failed to consider the relevant country conditions in Mexico before determining that he failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his qualifying relatives, this claim is unexhausted, and therefore we lack jurisdiction to address it. See Martinez-Guevara v. Garland, 27 F.4th 353, 360 (5th Cir. 2022). We review the BIA’s decision and consider the immigration judge’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence, and legal determinations are reviewed de novo. Guerrero Trejo v. Garland, 3 F.4th 760, 774 (5th Cir. 2021). Cancellation of removal is available to applicants who have been continuously present in the United States for 10 or more years prior to filing an application, who can establish good moral character during that time, who have no disqualifying convictions, and whose spouse, children, or parent would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if the applicant were removed. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1). Despite Esquivel-Muniz’s assertions to the contrary, the consequences facing his father and children if he were removed are not “‘substantially’ beyond the ordinary hardship that would be expected when a close family member leaves this country.” Guerrero Trejo, 3 F.4th at 775 (quoting In Re Monreal-Aguinaga, 23 I. & N. Dec. 56, 62 (BIA 2001)). Moreover, his claim that little weight was afforded to the financial hardships that his children and father would face if he were removed or to the difficulties his children would face relocating to Mexico is belied by the record. The record reflects that the BIA considered whether the financial, 2 Case: 21-60769 Document: 00516351568 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/09/2022 No. 21-60769 emotional, and educational hardship that Esquivel-Muniz’s father and children would rise to the level of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship and that the immigration judge explicitly considered …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals