2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 6-17-2008 

# T ant ale an-B e ra v

. Atty Ge n U SA P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-2525

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " T ant ale an-Be r a v

. Atty Ge n U SA" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1011. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/1011NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 07- 2525 F E RN ANDO T ANT AL E AN- BE RA , Pet i t i oner

v. ATTO RN EY G ENER AL O F THE UN I TED STATES

O n P e tit io n f

o r R e v iew o f

a n O rd e r o f

R e m o v a l o f

th e B o a rd o f

Im m ig ra tio n A p p e a ls ( A gencyN o. A 97- 959- 834) Im m ig ra tio n Ju d g e : H e n ryS . D o g in Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

J une 4, 2008 B efor e: A M B R O , FI SH E R and J O R D A N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: J une 17, 2008)

OP I NI ON P E R C UR I AM F e rn a n d o T a n tale a n -B e ra se e k s re v iew o f a f in a l o rd e r o f

re m o v a l. W e w ill d is m is s th e p e titio n f

o r r e v ie w . T ant al ean- B er a i s a nat i ve and c i t i zen of Peru. H e ent er ed the U ni t ed St at esA n al i en s eeki ng canc el l at i on of r emoval m us ts how that : ( 1) the al i en has been 1 p h y sicall yp rese n t i n the U n it ed S tat es f o r a c o n ti n u o u s p eriod o f n o t l ess th an 1 0 y ea rs i m m edi at el ypr ece di ng the dat e of the al i en’ s appl i cat i on forcanc el l at i on of r emoval ; ( 2) the al i en has been a per s on of good m or al char act erdur i ng s uch per i od; ( 3) the al i en has n o t b e e n c o n v icte d o f

a c rim in a l o f

f e n se ; an d (4 ) th e a lien ’s r e m o v a l w o u ld re su lt i n excep t i on al and extr em el yun usual hardshi p to the ali en’s s po use, parentor chi l d w ho i s a U n ite d S ta te s c itiz e n o r l a w f u l p e rm a n e n t r e s id e n t. 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 2 9 b (b )( 1 )( A )- (D ).

2 w i thouti ns pect i on i n A pr i l , 1994. T he D epart m entof H om el and Secur i tyi s s ued a N ot i ce t o Ap p e a ro n No v e mb e r2 8 , 2 0 0 4 , s t a t i n g th a tT a n t a l e a n - Be r a wa s i n v i o l a t i o n o f I NA § 212( a) ( 6) ( A ) ( i ) . T ant al ean- B er a conc eded r emovabi l i tyand appl i ed forcanc el l at i on of r emoval underI N A § 240A ( b) ( 1) on A pr i l 27, 2005. T he I m m i gr at i on J udge ( “I J ”) hel d a h e a rin g o n M a rc h 1 , 2 0 0 6 , an d d e n ied th e a p p lica tio n f o r c a n c e llatio n o f

re m o v a l, co n clud ing that T an tal ea n -B era h ad fa il ed to m ee t th e statuto rycrit eria. T an tal ea n -B era 1 appea l ed t o the B oar d of I m m i gr at i on A ppeal s ( “B I A ”) , w hi ch di s m i s s ed hi s appea l . T he B I A found no err ori n t he I J ’ s det erm i nat i on thatT ant al ean- B er a’ s w i fe w oul d nots uffe r exce pt i onal har ds hi p “bey ond thatw hi ch or di nar i l yw oul d be expe ct ed t o r es ul tfr om t he [pet i t i oner ’ s ] r emoval . ” B I A op. D et erm i ni ng thatfai l ur e t o s at i s fythi s fac t oral one r ender ed Tant al ean- B er a i nel i gi bl e forcanc el l at i on of r emoval , the B I A decl i ned t o r eac h a n yo th e r i s s u e th a t h e h a d ra is e d . In h is pe ti ti o n fo r rev iew , T an tal ea n -B era raises tw o arg u m en ts: (1) tha t th e IJ v iolated h is r igh t t o d u e p roc ess b yen g ag ing in b iased q u esti o n ing ; and (2) tha t th e B IA err ed i n aff

i r m i ng the I J ’ s det erm i nat i on thathe w as notent i t l ed t o canc el l at i on of r emoval beca us e he ha d notdemonstr at ed thathi s r emoval w oul d r es ul ti n exce pt i onal3

and extr emel yunus ual har ds hi p t o hi s s pous e. W e ca nnotcons i derT ant al ean- B er a’ s ar gum entthatthe I J ’ s m annerof ques t i oni ng v iolated d u e p roc ess b ec au se h e f ail ed to raise this i ssu e b ef o re the B IA . S ee B o n h o m etre v . G o n z a le s , 4 1 4 F .3 d 4 4 2 , 4 4 7 -4 8 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). D e n ia ls o f

d is c re tio n a ry re lie f

a re n o t s u b

je c t to ju d ic ia l r e v ie w . 8 U .S .C . § 1252( a) ( 2) ( B ) . W hetheran al i en w i l l s uffe r“exc ept i onal and extr emel yunus ual h ard sh ip,” as req u ir ed fo r ca n ce ll ati o n o f re m o v al, is prec isel ysu ch a d iscreti o n ary d e t e r m i n a t i o n . Me n d e z - Mo r a n c h e l v . A s h c r o f t , 3 3 8 F . 3 d 1 7 6 , 1 7 9 ( 3 d C i r . 2 0 0 3 ) . We l ack j ur i s di ct i on t o r evi ew the di s cr et i onarydeci s i on thatT ant al ean- B er a fa i l ed t o s how e x c e p tio n a l a n d e x tr e m e ly u n u s u a l h a rd s h ip . 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 2 9 b (b )( 1 )( D ). A s T a n tale a n -B e ra h a s p re se n ted n o iss u e th a t w e m a yre v iew , w e w ill d ism iss h is p e titio n f o r r e v ie w .