Lopez Cano v. Bondi

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · August 28, 2025 · No. 22-1941

Summary

This First Circuit opinion reviews the Board of Immigration Appeals' denial of a Guatemalan national's applications for cancellation of removal, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court affirms the agency's decisions, finding insufficient evidence of exceptional hardship to qualifying relatives, no nexus between the petitioner's feared harm and a statutorily protected ground, and waiver of the CAT claim due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Consequently, the petition for review is denied.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Writing for the Court
Gelpí; Lipez; Thompson
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decision date
August 28, 2025
Docket number
22-1941
Procedural posture
Petition for Review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an Immigration Judge’s denial of cancellation of removal, withholding of removal, and CAT protection.
Standard of review
De novo review of legal issues; substantial‑evidence deferential review of factual findings; agency decisions reviewed under the appropriate standard for cancellation, withholding, and CAT claims.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Glendy Marleny Lopez Cano v. Pamela J. Bondi
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

cancellation of removaldeportationimmigration

Practice areas

immigration

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the BIA erred in denying Lopez Cano’s cancellation of removal claim.
  2. Whether the BIA erred in denying Lopez Cano’s withholding of removal claim.
  3. Whether the BIA erred in denying Lopez Cano’s protection under the Convention Against Torture.

Holdings

  1. The court affirmed the BIA’s denial, finding no error in the agency’s determination that Lopez Cano failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her qualifying relatives.
  2. The court affirmed the BIA’s denial, holding that Lopez Cano failed to establish a nexus between her feared persecution and a protected ground.
  3. The court affirmed the BIA’s denial, finding that Lopez Cano waived the CAT claim by failing to meaningfully challenge the IJ’s denial.

Key quotations

The BIA accepted the IJ's finding that Tommy suffers from anxiety but, like the IJ, found no basis for concluding that the hardship to Tommy, or the cumulative hardship to Lopez Cano's three children, would be exceptional and extremely unusual. (at 5)
We are unpersuaded for several independent reasons. As an initial matter, Monreal's use of permissive language makes clear that the agency may, but is not required to, consider each of the enumerated factors. (at 14)

Factual background

Lopez Cano, a Guatemalan native, entered the United States in 2000 and has three U.S. citizen children. She alleges death threats and extortion by individuals jealous of her father’s meat‑shop business and an incident where an unknown man held a knife to her throat. She claims the threats are based on her relationship to her father, constituting a particular social group, and fears gang‑related torture if returned. Her son Tommy suffers from anxiety requiring weekly psychotherapy in the United States.

Procedural history

The Immigration Judge denied Lopez Cano’s applications for cancellation of removal, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the IJ’s decisions on all three grounds. Lopez Cano filed a petition for review in the First Circuit.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…