Roberto Navarro-Castro v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 354 F. App'x 33 ( 2009 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
November 11, 2009
No. 09-60123 Charles R. Fulbruge III
Summary Calendar Clerk
ROBERTO CARLOS NAVARRO-CASTRO,
Petitioner
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent
Petition for Review of an Order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals
No. A88 015 914
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roberto Carlos Narvarro-Castro appeals the Board of Immigration
Appeals order affirming the Immigration Judge’s decision to deny his application
for cancellation of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act. As this
court lacks jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), the petition is
dismissed.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
R. 47.5.4.
No. 09-60123
Navarro-Castro conceded removability and on May 28, 2008 submitted his
application for cancellation of removal, claiming that his removal to Mexico
would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his three United
States citizen children. The Immigration Judge found that while a hardship
existed,1 it did not rise to the level of “exceptional and extremely unusual
hardship” as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b).
This court does not have jurisdiction to review the Immigration Judge’s
discretionary decision that Navarro-Castro’s children would not suffer an
“exceptional and extremely unusual hardship.” 2 For that reason, Navarro-
Castro’s petition is DISMISSED.
1
The Immigration Judge found that (1) the children would likely have to move to
Mexico to stay with a parent as their mother was also in the country illegally; (2) none of the
three daughters, aged 14, 11, and 8, could read or write Spanish, although they could speak
it; (3) the prospect of moving to Mexico was causing them to suffer “depression”; and (4) one
of the daughters had a weight problem. In addition, Navarro-Castro alleges that (1) he would
be unable to find work in his home village in Mexico and that his family there relied on his
income from the United States; (2) his family’s home in Mexico lacks running water or indoor
plumbing; (3) the daughter who is overweight has preindications of diabetes; (4) his eldest
daughter would likely have to quit school to help the family financially if they move to Mexico;
and (5) the educational opportunities in Mexico are extremely limited when compared to those
available to his children in the United States.
2
8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Sung v. Kiesler, 505 F.3d 372, 377 (5th Cir. 2007).
2