Cadena Flores v. Bondi

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 25 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE GUADALUPE CADENA FLORES, No. 24-5409 Agency No. Petitioner, A216-204-466 v. MEMORANDUM* PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 21, 2025** Phoenix, Arizona Before: MURGUIA, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Jose Guadalupe Cadena Flores petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming the order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for cancellation of removal. We review that decision for * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). substantial evidence, Gonzalez-Juarez v. Bondi, 137 F.4th 996, 1005 (9th Cir. 2025), and we deny the petition. To qualify for cancellation, an applicant must establish that their removal will result in hardship to a qualifying relative that is substantially different from, or beyond, the hardship ordinarily associated with removal from the United States. Id. at 1005–06. “It must deviate, in the extreme, from the norm.” Id. at 1006. The agency must consider the cumulative hardship, considering the ages, health, and circumstances of the qualifying family members. Id. (citing In re Monreal- Aguinaga, 23 I. & N. Dec. 56, 65 (BIA 2001)). The agency should also consider family and social support and whether the respondent is the sole means of support for the qualifying relatives. In re Recinas, 23 I. & N. Dec. 467, 470–71 (BIA 2002). Cadena Flores sought cancellation based on hardship to his two U.S. citizen- children, Jose and Mia, who at the time of the hearing were ages thirteen and sixteen. The children live with their mother during the week and with Cadena Flores on weekends and during some vacations; upon his removal they would remain with their mother full-time. Jose is in good health, but Mia has cystic fibrosis, a condition from which she will suffer for the remainder of her life. However, Mia receives health insurance from the State of Arizona, and her condition is “pretty controlled” by medication and treatments. Cadena Flores has friends and relatives in the town 2 24-5409 that he would move to and would likely be able to find work and continue to support his family from Mexico. Although his children may, as the BIA recognized, suffer emotional and financial hardship if Cadena Flores is removed, the totality of the evidence does not compel the conclusion that Cadena Flores met the high burden of demonstrating a hardship to a qualifying relative from his removal that is substantially different from or beyond that normally resulting from removal of a close family member. See Gonzalez-Jaurez, 137 F.4th at 1005–08. PETITION DENIED. 3 24-5409