United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Immigration – removal — sham marriages
The court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s factual determination that an alien’s marriage to a citizen was a sham.
“Unfortunately for Jawad, however, even a cursory look at the record reveals that in his case, unlike in Iglesias or Champion, the IJ did not ignore Elham’s testimony or skip any steps in the legal analysis. To the contrary, the IJ described Elham’s testimony in detail and evaluated its relevance. Jawad now seeks to recast his frustration with the IJ’s factual findings as error, but his efforts are unavailing. As the old saying goes, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear, and, as both we and our sister circuits have repeatedly held, a petitioner can’t manufacture a legal dispute over a disagreement on the facts. Jezierski v. Mukasey, 543 F.3d 886, 890 (7th Cir. 2008); Adrien v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 446 F. App’x 172, 176 (11th Cir. 2011); Kamara v. Holder, 368 F. App’x 720, 721 (9th Cir. 2010); Lakhavani v. Mukasey, 255 F. App’x 819, 821 (5th Cir. 2007).”
“We conclude that we lack jurisdiction over Jawad’s petition for review, as it presents nothing within the scope of 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) that would cause us to examine the agency’s discretionary denial of adjustment of status and cancellation of removal.”
Petition for Review of a Final Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Wood, J.