Galeano-Romero v. Barr

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS August 4, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________ RENIERY ADALBERTO GALEANO- ROMERO, a/k/a Reniery Galeano-Romero, a/k/a Reniery Adalberto Galeano Romero, Petitioner, v. No. 19-9585 WILLIAM P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ Appeal from the Board of Immigration Appeals (Petition for Review) _________________________________ Submitted on the briefs: * Alison Berry of the Law Office of Alison Berry, Esq., White Plains, New York, for Petitioner. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General; John S. Hogan, Assistant Director, and Rebecca Hoffberg Phillips, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. _________________________________ Before HOLMES, SEYMOUR, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge. _________________________________ Reniery Adalberto Galeano-Romero seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that denied both his application for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1) and his motion to remand and reopen his case to raise a Convention Against Torture (CAT) claim. The Board acknowledged that his removal would result in hardship to his citizen spouse but concluded that the hardship would not be “exceptional and extremely unusual,” leaving him ineligible for cancellation of removal. § 1229b(b)(1)(D). And the Board denied his motion to remand to present his CAT claim to an Immigration Judge (IJ), after noting that Galeano-Romero had referenced no previously unavailable and material evidence, a prerequisite to any such motion to reopen. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(1). This timely petition for review followed, in which Galeano-Romero challenges both decisions. We lack jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B) to consider his challenge to the Board’s discretionary hardship decision, so we dismiss this portion of his petition for lack of jurisdiction. 1 Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), we deny the portion of his petition pertaining to his motion to remand. 1 The government filed a motion to dismiss Galeano-Romero’s cancellation-of- removal claim on this basis, which we grant. 2 BACKGROUND Since March 2001, when he arrived as a seven-year-old child from Honduras, Galeano-Romero has unlawfully resided in the United States. 2 On November 22, 2016, after he was arrested and indicted in Texas for assault with a deadly weapon, the Department of Homeland Security served him with a notice to appear and took him into custody. On April 19, 2017, Galeano-Romero appeared with counsel before an IJ and conceded removability based on his unlawful presence in the country. 3 He then informed the IJ that he intended to seek cancellation of removal under § 1229b(b)(1). But his eligibility for relief under this provision depended in part on the outcome of his pending criminal case. See § 1229b(b)(1)(C) (disqualifying aliens from cancellation of removal if ...

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