Solis v. Holder, 647 F.3d 831

Solis Mendoza, a Guatemala native, sought cancellation of removal in immigration court after entering the U.S. without inspection in 1992.
During removal proceedings (initiated in 2006), the IJ granted cancellation of removal after finding Solis met statutory requirements.
The BIA vacated the IJ’s decision, denying cancellation and granting voluntary departure, on the basis that the IJ applied the wrong legal standard for exceptional and extremely unusual hardship.
The government argues this court lacks jurisdiction to review the discretionary denial, but jurisdiction exists to review nondiscretionary determinations and the legal standards applied.
The court concludes it may review the nondiscretionary determinations and the BIA’s application of the law to the facts, but upholds the BIA’s de novo determination denying cancellation.
Ultimately, the petition for review is denied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction to review cancellation of removal denial	Solis asserts appellate review is available for legal questions and nondiscretionary determinations.	Government contends §1252(a)(2)(B)(i) bars review of discretionary denial, permitting review only of constitutional or legal questions.	Court has jurisdiction to review nondiscretionary legal determinations underlying the denial.
Proper standard for exceptional and extremely unusual hardship	BIA misapplied the hardship standard; the IJ’s reasoning should be reviewed.	The proper issue is whether the BIA properly applied the law to the facts; the discretionary hardship determination is not subject to review.	The court reviews the BIA’s application of the law to the facts; the discretionary hardship determination itself is not subject to reversal here.

Pinos-Gonzalez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 436 (8th Cir.2008) (review of constitutional claims or questions of law in petitions for review)
Solano-Chicas v. Gonzales, 440 F.3d 1050 (8th Cir.2006) (scope of review for BIA decisions; non-discretionary determinations)
Reyes-Vasquez v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 903 (8th Cir.2005) (jurisdiction limits on review of discretionary relief)
Fofanah v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 1037 (8th Cir.2006) (review of BIA adoption of IJ findings)
Cherichel v. Holder, 591 F.3d 1002 (8th Cir.2010) (BIA deference on IJ findings when reviewing final agency decision)
Falaja v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 889 (8th Cir.2005) (BIA’s de novo review framework)
Gomez-Perez v. Holder, 569 F.3d 370 (8th Cir.2009) (proper weighting of hardship factors in discretionary determinations)
Guled v. Mukasey, 515 F.3d 872 (8th Cir.2008) (balancing test for hardship considerations)
Zacarias-Velasquez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 429 (8th Cir.2007) (discretionary nature of hardship determinations)
Meraz-Reyes v. Gonzales, 436 F.3d 842 (8th Cir.2006) (limits of review of discretionary relief under §1229b)