Vasco Rusello v. Eric Holder, Jr.

MEMORANDUM

Vasco Ezzat Rusello petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order sustaining the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) appeal from a decision of the immigration judge (“IJ”) granting Rusello’s application for special-rule cancellation of removal under the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 (“VAWA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2).

Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(D), we have jurisdiction to review questions of law. Whether the BIA applied the correct standard of review is a question of law. Perez-Palafox v. Holder, 744 F.3d 1138, 1143 (9th Cir.2014); Vitug v. Holder, 723 F.3d 1056, 1062-64 (9th Cir.2013). Here, in concluding that Rusello did not demonstrate the requisite hardship to be eligible for special-rule cancellation of removal, the BIA engaged in de novo review of the IJ’s factual findings and conducted its own factfinding in violation of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1 (d)(3).

The BIA rejected the IJ’s finding that Rusello’s information technology (“IT”) experience was outdated, reasoning that Ru-sello did not offer evidence that he had inquired into job opportunities abroad for someone with his qualifications. The BIA, however, did not conclude…