18-1930 Hernandez-Hernandez v. Barr BIA Connelly, IJ A 208 277 797 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 24th day of October, two thousand nineteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 GUIDO CALABRESI, 8 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 9 JOSEPH F. BIANCO, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 EDWIN ANTONIO HERNANDEZ- 14 HERNANDEZ, 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 18-1930 18 NAC 19 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent. 22 _____________________________________ 23 24 FOR PETITIONER: Devin S. Sikes, Ramin Mohammad, 25 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 26 LLP, Washington, DC; Melissa 27 Gibson, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & 28 Feld LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Robert 29 H. Pees, Nicole A. Greenstein, 30 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 31 LLP, New York, NY. 32 FOR RESPONDENT: Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant 33 Attorney General; Matthew B. 34 George, Senior Litigation Counsel; 1 Erik R. Quick, Trial Attorney, 2 Office of Immigration Litigation, 3 United States Department of 4 Justice, Washington, DC. 5 6 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 7 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 8 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 9 is GRANTED. 10 Petitioner Edwin Antonio Hernandez-Hernandez, a native 11 and citizen of El Salvador, seeks review of a June 18, 2018, 12 decision of the BIA affirming a December 21, 2017, decision 13 of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Hernandez-Hernandez’s 14 application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief 15 under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Edwin 16 Antonio Hernandez-Hernandez, No. A 208 277 797 (B.I.A. June 17 18, 2018), aff’g No. A 208 277 797 (Immig. Ct. Batavia Dec. 18 21, 2017). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 19 underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 20 Under the circumstances of this case, we have reviewed 21 the IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA. See Xue Hong Yang 22 v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). 23 We review the agency’s legal conclusions de novo and its 24 factual findings under the substantial evidence standard. 2 1 Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 324, 332 (2d Cir. 2013). “[T]he 2 administrative findings of fact are ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals