De Garcia v. Holder

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, where a petitioner moved to file a supplemental brief, “the BIA was required to exercise [its] discretion” whether to consider the brief
• noting that the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard for cancellation of removal is a very demanding one
• providing that a motion to reopen will not be granted absent a showing of prima facie eligibility for relief based on demonstrating a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements have been satisfied
• providing that a motion to reopen will not be granted absent a showing of prima facie eligibility for relief based on demonstrating a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied
• providing that a motion to reopen will not be granted absent a showing of prima facie eligibility for relief based on demonstrating a reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief have been satisfied
• noting that the “‘exceptional and extremely unusual hardship’ standard is a very demanding one” and concluding that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the petitioners’ proffered evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).