Moises Lopez Estevez v. Loretta E. Lynch

MEMORANDUM

An immigration judge denied Moisés Lopez Estevez’s application for cancellation of removal because Lopez “presented insufficient evidence for the Court to infer or , conclude that his removal will result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to any of his three United States citizen children.” See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l). Lopez filed a motion to reopen the removal proceedings so that he could present additional evidence of hardship. He also appealed the immigration judge’s decision. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of removal. It then construed the motion to reopen as a motion to remand, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(4), and denied it. Lopez petitions for review only of the denial of the motion to reopen. He does not challenge the BIA’s determination that he failed to demonstrate “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” at his hearing before the immigration judge. We dismiss in part and deny in part Lopez’s petition.

1. Lopez’s motion to reopen was based on two categories of additional evidence: (1) evidence not presented at the hearing due to alleged ineffective assistance of counsel, and (2) post-hearing…