NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _______________ No. 22-2160 _______________ WILLIAM LEMOS-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA _______________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A205-495-104) Immigration Judge: Tamar H. Wilson _______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) March 20, 2023 Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, JR., and McKEE, Circuit Judges (Filed: April 4, 2023) _______________ OPINION _______________ JORDAN, Circuit Judge. William Lemos-Rodriguez petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) to deny his This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and, pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7, does not constitute binding precedent. application for cancellation of removal. He contends that the IJ denied him due process by failing to adequately consider the expert report of a psychologist that described the hardship his daughter would suffer if he were deported. He also asserts that the IJ denied him due process by preventing the psychologist from testifying at his merits hearing. As discussed below, those claims fail because the IJ considered the expert report prepared by the psychologist, and Lemos-Rodriguez has not – either at the hearing or before us – identified what, if any, additional information would have been adduced by hearing the psychologist’s live testimony. We will therefore deny his petition. I. BACKGROUND Lemos-Rodriguez is a Salvadoran citizen who unlawfully entered the United States in October 1999. Sometime in 2007, he began living with a woman named Estefania Villasenor, and in December 2010, the couple had a daughter, who is a U.S. citizen. At age five, their daughter was diagnosed with separation anxiety disorder and adjustment disorder. She also suffers from, among other things, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, a learning difficulty, and sleeping difficulties. In June 2012, the United States Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against Lemos-Rodriguez by issuing him a Notice to Appear before the Immigration Court.1 Lemos-Rodriguez conceded his removability. He then applied 1 The Notice to Appear charged that Lemos-Rodriguez was subject to removal due to his status as “an alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or paroled.” (A.R. at 657.) 2 for cancellation of removal on the ground that his removal would cause “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to his daughter.2 (A.R. at 510.) In support of his hardship claim, Lemos-Rodriguez submitted an expert report and an affidavit from psychologist Weili Lu, Ph.D, who examined Lemos-Rodriguez’s daughter in March 2016 and again in May 2019. Those filings reported Dr. Lu’s conclusion that Lemos-Rodriguez’s daughter suffers from separation anxiety disorder and is recovering from adjustment disorder, and that, although her psychiatric symptoms had improved since March 2016 with the help of therapy, they could worsen if the government removed Lemos-Rodriguez to El Salvador. 3 In addition to Dr. Lu’s expert report and affidavit, Lemos-Rodriguez submitted documents showing that, from 2012 to 2016, he was twice convicted for operating a motor vehicle while …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals