Julio Hernandez Olivos v. Merrick Garland
This text of Julio Hernandez Olivos v. Merrick Garland (Julio Hernandez Olivos v. Merrick Garland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 12 2022 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JULIO HERNANDEZ OLIVOS, AKA Julio No. 19-72380 Hernandez, Agency No. A215-855-171 Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney Gen- eral,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 10, 2022** Anchorage, Alaska
Before: S.R. THOMAS, McKEOWN, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Julio Hernandez Olivos, a native of Mexico, seeks review of a decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of
a continuance and denying petitioner’s motion to remand. We review both decisions
* 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). for abuse of discretion. Orozco-Lopez v. Garland, 11 F.4th 764, 774 (9th Cir. 2021)
(continuance); Taggar v. Holder, 736 F.3d 886, 889 (9th Cir. 2013) (remand).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by affirming the IJ’s denial of a continu-
ance. Hernandez Olivos did not meet his burden of showing that his visa petition
was prima facie approvable under the “bona fide marriage” exemption, 8 C.F.R.
§§ 204.2(a)(l)(iii).
The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to remand based
on its determination that the new evidence would not constitute exceptional and ex-
tremely unusual hardship. See Aguilar-Osorio v. Garland, 991 F.3d 997, 999
(9th Cir. 2021) (“This court does not have jurisdiction to review the merits of the
BIA’s discretionary decision to deny cancellation of removal based on hardship.”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Julio Hernandez Olivos v. Merrick Garland, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/julio-hernandez-olivos-v-merrick-garland-ca9-2022.