Isidro-Zamorano

Isidro-Zamorano v. Holder

Good Law
365 F. App'x 846
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 18, 201007-73832California477 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Valentin Isidro-Zamorano appeals the BIA’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal. The facts are well-known to the parties. We need not repeat them here.

An alien is eligible for cancellation of removal if he establishes, among other things, “that removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien’s spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D) (emphasis added). A “child” is “an unmarried person under twenty-one years of age.” 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (b)(1). At the time Isidro-Zamorano applied for cancellation of removal his son, Tomas, was twenty years old, and could serve as Isidro-Zamorano’s qualifying relative for his application. During the course of immigration proceedings, Tomas “aged out,” turning twenty-one years old. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) subsequently ruled Isidro-Zamora-no ineligible. for cancellation of removal because he no longer had a qualifying relative. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), in a one-judge decision, affirmed.

The BIA and IJ relied on a decision by a prior three-judge panel of the BIA,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.