Chaves Angel v. Bondi

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: March 12, 2026
• Docket: 23-471
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 12 2026 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SERGIO CHAVES ANGEL, No. 23-471 Agency No. Petitioner, A206-081-852 v. MEMORANDUM* PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 6, 2026** San Francisco, California

Before: M. SMITH and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and LEFKOW, District

Judge.***

Petitioner Sergio Chaves Angel is a native and citizen of Guatemala. Chaves

Angel petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honorable Joan H. Lefkow, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation. (“BIA”) affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his post-conclusion

request for voluntary departure.1 We review both decisions “[w]here, as here, the

BIA adopts the IJ’s decision while adding some of its own reasoning.” Lopez-

Cardona v. Holder, 662 F.3d 1110, 1111 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Siong v. INS, 376

F.3d 1030, 1036 (9th Cir. 2004)). “We review constitutional claims and questions

of law de novo and review factual findings under the deferential substantial

evidence standard.” Id. We dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

1. Although this court has jurisdiction to review agency determinations of

law, including mixed questions of law and fact decided under statutory factors, see

Wilkinson v. Garland, 601 U.S. 209, 225 (2024), we lack jurisdiction to review the

discretionary denial of a request for voluntary departure pursuant to 8 U.S.C.

§ 1229c(b)(1). See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229c(f), 1252(a)(2)(B)(i); Esquivel-Garcia v.

Holder, 593 F.3d 1025, 1030 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(f)) (other

citations omitted). In his petition for review, Chaves Angel challenges the agency’s

decision to deny him post-conclusion voluntary departure, claiming that he meets

all the factors required for such relief. But the IJ found that Chaves Angel met the

statutory requirements for post-conclusion voluntary departure. It merely denied

1 The IJ also denied Chaves Angel’s application for cancellation of removal. In his petition for review, Chaves Angel does not claim error in the agency’s denial of cancellation of removal and his opening brief expressly states that he is not challenging this issue.

2 23-471 Chaves Angel voluntary departure in an exercise of discretion, which the BIA

affirmed upon its own review. As such, Chaves Angel does not seek review of an

agency determination of law but rather its exercise of discretion in denying him

voluntary departure. We lack jurisdiction to review this discretionary

determination. Cf. Wilkinson, 601 U.S. at 225 n.4 (“[I]f the IJ decides a noncitizen

is eligible for cancellation of removal at step one, his step-two discretionary

determination on whether or not to grant cancellation of removal in the particular

case is not reviewable as a question of law.”).

PETITION DISMISSED.2

2 As Chaves Angel has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits, Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009), his motion to stay removal (Dkt. 3) is denied.

3 23-471