Sergio Alberto Hernandez-Valenzuela, a non-citizen, sought cancellation of removal, a form of relief that allows certain long-term residents to stay in the United States if their removal would cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. The Immigration Judge denied his application, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed that decision without issuing a separate opinion. Hernandez-Valenzuela petitioned the Ninth Circuit for review, arguing that the Immigration Judge overlooked evidence regarding his family's hardship and that his children, including those with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status, would suffer significantly if he were removed.
The panel reviewed the case under the substantial evidence standard, which prohibits the court from reweighing evidence and requires upholding the agency's determination unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. The court first addressed the definition of a qualifying relative, noting that only U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents count. Consequently, Hernandez-Valenzuela's three children with DACA status were excluded from the hardship analysis. Regarding his three U.S. citizen children, the court found the record did not compel a finding of exceptional hardship. The petitioner argued that his children's limited Spanish proficiency and the family's financial dependence on him constituted hardship. The court rejected these arguments, noting that the children would remain in the United States and that the petitioner's wife could enter the workforce, supported by testimony that his eldest daughter is financially independent and would assist. Furthermore, the court cited precedent stating that the possibility of financial difficulties due to poor economic conditions abroad is insufficient. Finally, the court reiterated that emotional suffering from the separation of parents from children is sadly common in the removal context and does not meet the high statutory bar.
The petition for review is denied, meaning the Immigration Judge's order denying cancellation of removal stands. The temporary stay of removal remains in place only until the mandate issues. The decision reinforces the strict evidentiary burden required to prove exceptional hardship and clarifies that DACA status does not confer the necessary eligibility for relatives in cancellation of removal cases.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download