Cecilio Tamayo Contreras, et al v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Pasco M. Bowman and Jane Kelly Denying [3993196-2] petition for review filed by Petitioners Mr. Cecilio Tamayo Contreras and Ms. Eva Yolanda Tamayo. (UNPUBLISHED) [4094369] [13-1101]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-1101 ___________________________ Cecilio Tamayo Contreras; Eva Yolanda Tamayo lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioners v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: November 7, 2013 Filed: November 8, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. El Salvadoran citizens Cecilio Tamayo Contreras and Eva Yolanda Tamayo petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which upheld an immigration judge’s (IJ’s) denial of special rule cancellation of removal under the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act. After careful consideration, we conclude that petitioners’ arguments regarding Contreras’s eligibility for special Appellate Case: 13-1101 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/08/2013 Entry ID: 4094369 rule cancellation of removal are unreviewable. See Molina Jerez v. Holder, 625 F.3d 1058, 1068-69 (8th Cir. 2010). We further conclude that factual errors mistakenly included in the IJ’s written decision--which the BIA corrected--do not warrant a remand. See United States v. Timley, 507 F.3d 1125, 1131 (8th Cir. 2007) (declining to remand case where it would be futile and waste of judicial resources). Accordingly, we deny the petition. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 13-1101 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/08/2013 Entry ID: 4094369

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?