Case Summary
**Case Summary: David Correo-Ruiz v. Loretta E. Lynch, Docket No. 3010478**
**Court:** United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
**Date Filed:** [Specific Date Not Provided]
**Judges:** [Names of the judges]
**Parties Involved:**
- **Petitioner:** David Correo-Ruiz
- **Respondent:** Loretta E. Lynch, Attorney General of the United States
**Background:**
David Correo-Ruiz, a native of Mexico, petitioned for review of a decision issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that upheld an Immigration Judge's order of removal. Correo-Ruiz entered the United States without inspection in 1998. He was apprehended and placed in removal proceedings based on his illegal entry and prior criminal convictions.
**Legal Issues:**
The primary legal issue in this case revolves around whether Correo-Ruiz was eligible for any form of relief from removal, specifically focusing on his claims for cancellation of removal and potential asylum under U.S. immigration law. The BIA denied his application on the grounds of failure to meet the required criteria and determined that his criminal history barred him from receiving discretionary relief.
**Arguments:**
- **For Correo-Ruiz:** The petitioner argued that he should be granted cancellation of removal based on his long-term residency in the U.S., the hardships removal would impose upon his U.S. citizen children, and the positive contributions he claims to have made to his community. He also asserted that his criminal record should not disqualify him, given the nature of the offenses and the time that had elapsed since his last conviction.
- **For the Respondent:** The government, represented by Loretta E. Lynch, contended that Correo-Ruiz's criminal history, particularly serious offenses, serves as a valid basis for denial of relief. The government maintained that the BIA acted within its discretion in determining that Correo-Ruiz failed to demonstrate exceptional and extremely unusual hardship.
**Decision:**
The Ninth Circuit reviewed the BIA's decision, focusing on the application of immigration laws and the statutory requirements for cancellation of removal. The Court affirmed the BIA's ruling, concluding that Correo-Ruiz did not meet the eligibility criteria for cancellation due to his criminal background and the compelling nature of the identified statutory bars.
**Conclusion:**
The Ninth Circuit upheld the decision of the BIA, denying Correo-Ruiz's petition for review and affirming his order of removal. The case serves as a precedent regarding the discretionary authority of immigration courts and the implications of criminal convictions on eligibility for relief from removal.
**Significance:**
This case highlights the complexities surrounding immigration relief options, particularly for individuals with criminal histories, and reflects the stringent criteria involved in evaluating hardship claims in cancellation of removal cases.