Mervyn Als-Mclister v. Loretta E. Lynch , 633 F. App'x 660 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            MAR 02 2016
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    MERVYN FRANCIS ALS-MCLISTER,                     No. 14-70656
    AKA Mervin Francis, AKA Mervyn
    Francis McLister-Als,                            Agency No. A205-324-111
    Petitioner,
    MEMORANDUM*
    v.
    LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted February 24, 2016**
    Before:        LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
    Mervyn Francis Als-McLister, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago,
    petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing
    his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for special
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    rule cancellation of removal under the Violence Against Women Act of 1994
    (“VAWA”). See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
    § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and for substantial evidence factual
    determinations. Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 
    345 F.3d 824
    , 832 (9th Cir. 2003). We
    deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Als-McLister
    failed to establish he had been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty by his
    U.S.-citizen spouse. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2)(A)(i); 
    Hernandez, 345 F.3d at 840
    (“extreme cruelty” is not “mere unkindness” and must rise to a level of an
    “extreme concept of domestic violence” in which a spouse engaged in
    “manipulative tactics aimed at ensuring the batterer’s dominance and control”).
    We do not consider Als-McLister’s challenge to his bond determination, see
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(d) (IJ’s consideration of an alien’s application or request
    regarding custody or bond “shall be separate and apart from . . . any deportation or
    removal hearing or proceeding”), any request for prosecutorial discretion, see
    Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 
    688 F.3d 642
    , 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (order), or evidence
    regarding the I-130 visa petition Als-McLister’s sister filed on his behalf, see
    Fisher v. INS, 
    79 F.3d 955
    , 963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc) (the court’s review is
    limited to the administrative record).
    2                                       14-70656
    In light of our disposition, we need not reach Als-McLister’s remaining
    contention regarding hardship.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
    3                                   14-70656
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-70656

Citation Numbers: 633 F. App'x 660

Judges: Fernandez, Leavy, Rawlinson

Filed Date: 3/2/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024