NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 19a0140n.06 No. 18-3493 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Mar 22, 2019 MIGUEL VILLAFANA QUEVEDO, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) Petitioner, ) ) On Petition for Review from v. ) the United States Board of ) Immigration Appeals WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, ) ) Respondent. ) _________________________________/ Before: MERRITT, GUY, and MOORE, Circuit Judges. RALPH B. GUY, JR., Circuit Judge. Miguel Villafana Quevedo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the denial of his application for discretionary cancellation of removal. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) agreed with the determination of the Immigration Judge (IJ) that petitioner was not eligible for cancellation of removal because he had not demonstrated that his removal to Mexico would result in “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to his United States citizen children. Because the BIA applied the correct legal standards and this court does not have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s weighing of the facts in making the hardship determination, Quevedo’s petition for review is DENIED in part and DISMISSED in part.1 1 Petitioner is referred to as “Quevedo,” although his name also appears in the record as “Villafana,” “Quevedo,” and “Villafana-Quevedo.” Case No. 18-3493 2 Quevedo v. Barr I. Quevedo was served with a Notice to Appear in March 2014. He appeared, conceded the charge of removability, and applied for discretionary cancellation of removal or, in the alternative, voluntary departure to Mexico. To be eligible for cancellation of removal, an alien has the burden to demonstrate: (1) continuous presence in the United States for not less than 10 years immediately preceding his application; (2) good moral character during that period; (3) that he has no disqualifying convictions; and (4) that “removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien’s spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D). Because there was no dispute that Quevedo satisfied the first three of these requirements, his eligibility for cancellation of removal depended on establishing the fourth. At the merits hearing on May 2, 2016, the IJ received documentary evidence and heard what she found to be credible testimony from petitioner, his wife, and their eldest daughter concerning his “relationship with his children and their dependency on him, the impact of his removal on his family, and the effects of [his] past drinking.” The IJ found that Quevedo was born in Mexico on May 23, 1973, and that he was 18 years old when he entered the United States without inspection on or about January 1, 1992. Petitioner returned to Mexico twice to visit family for two-weeks each time (1995 and 2003). He married his wife Isidra, also an undocumented alien from Mexico, on August 9, 1997. Together they have three United States citizen children: a daughter named Maribel born in 1998; a son named Juan Diego born in 2003; and a daughter ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals