Case: 20-60429 Document: 00516496893 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/05/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 5, 2022 No. 20-60429 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Rafael Gomez-Vargas, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A205 635 840 Before Clement, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* This immigration case presents two issues: First, whether the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) erred in concluding that additional evidence proffered by Petitioner Rafael Gomez-Vargas was not likely to change the outcome regarding his application for cancellation of removal. Second, whether this court has jurisdiction to review Gomez-Vargas’s * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 20-60429 Document: 00516496893 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/05/2022 No. 20-60429 challenge to the BIA’s determination that he was ineligible for cancellation of removal. We hold that the BIA did not err in denying the motion to remand to consider the new evidence and that this court does not have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s cancellation of removal determination. I. Gomez-Vargas, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States in 1989 near Hidalgo, Texas, without being admitted or paroled by an immigration officer. In 2012, he was served with a notice to appear charging him with removability pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). He admitted the allegations and conceded he was removable as charged. Gomez-Vargas then filed an application for cancellation of removal, claiming that his removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship for his five United States citizen children. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D). 1 The immigration judge (“IJ”) held a hearing on Gomez-Vargas’s application for cancellation of removal. To demonstrate hardship, Gomez- Vargas discussed his three children who still lived at home, detailing their academic performances, their struggles with his pending removal, and his desire to provide for them as the sole breadwinner of his family. He explained that his detention was especially difficult for his youngest child and that his children would suffer hardship if he were removed because they have never been cared for by another person. Gomez-Vargas worried that his family would lose their home if he were removed. He also testified that he was responsible for part of his older son’s college tuition and indicated his belief that his removal would make it impossible for his children to continue their 1 In order to be eligible for cancellation of removal under § 1229b(b)(1), a petitioner must demonstrate “that removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to [his] spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.” 2 Case: 20-60429 Document: 00516496893 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/05/2022 No. 20-60429 studies. Finally, Gomez-Vargas expressed concern regarding his …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals