Naun Rigoberto Sauceda Martinez v. U.S. Attorney General


USCA11 Case: 20-13961 Date Filed: 11/03/2021 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-13961 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ NAUN RIGOBERTO SAUCEDA MARTINEZ, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A206-612-769 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-13961 Date Filed: 11/03/2021 Page: 2 of 8 2 Opinion of the Court 20-13961 Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Nuan Rigoberto Sauceda Martinez, a native and citizen of Honduras, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order adopting and affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for cancellation of removal on the ground that Sauceda Martinez did not show that his removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his U.S. citizen son. 1 Sauceda Martinez argues that the IJ and the BIA violated his due process rights and incorrectly applied the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard by requiring him to prove that the requisite hardship was 1 The Attorney General may cancel the removal of an inadmissible or removable alien and adjust the status of the alien to that of a lawful permanent resident if the alien: (A) has been physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 10 years immediately preceding the date of such application; (B) has been a person of good moral character during such period; (C) has not been convicted of [certain specified offenses]; and (D) establishes 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). USCA11 Case: 20-13961 Date Filed: 11/03/2021 Page: 3 of 8 20-13961 Opinion of the Court 3 “unconscionable.” 2 After review, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. I. Background Sauceda Martinez entered the United States without inspection in December 2003. In 2014, the Department of Homeland Security served Sauceda Martinez with a notice to appear, charging him as removable for being an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. Sauceda Martinez conceded removability and sought cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1). In his application, he asserted that his removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his minor son, Ever Sauceda Bardales, who is a U.S. citizen. In relevant part, at the merits hearing on his application for cancellation of removal, Sauceda Martinez testified that Ever, born in 2007, was his only child. Sauceda Martinez’s relationship with Ever’s mother ended in 2011, and Ever lives with his mother and his stepfather in Washington, D.C. Sauceda Martinez, who lives in Florida, visits Ever twice a year and calls him every day. Sauceda Martinez testified that he provides $350-400 in monthly child support for Ever, but he does so voluntarily and not pursuant to a court …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals