Victor Gomez v. Loretta E. Lynch, No. 15-2869 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Wollman, Bowman and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. The court lacks jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that petitioner had failed to establish an exceptional and unusual hardship for cancellation of removal; as he must establish this element, as well as the other three prerequisites for cancellation, the adverse hardship determination is dispositive of his claim.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 15-2869 ___________________________ Victor Vargas Gomez lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: April 25, 2016 Filed: April 28, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Mexican citizen Victor Vargas Gomez petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1) (permitting cancellation of removal for alien (1) physically present in the United States continuously for at least 10 years immediately preceding application, (2) with good moral character during that period, (3) not convicted of certain offenses, and (4) whose removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to alien’s spouse, parent, or child, who is a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident). Vargas Gomez argues that the BIA erred in concluding that he did not have the requisite continuous physical presence and that he did not establish that his removal would result in an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his United States citizen sons. We lack jurisdiction to review the discretionary determination that Vargas Gomez had failed to establish an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. See Solis v. Holder, 647 F.3d 831, 833 (8th Cir. 2011). Under the conjunctive language of section 1229b(b)(1), Vargas Gomez had to meet all four prerequisites for cancellation of removal; thus, the hardship determination is dispositive of the matter before us. The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
