Bato Petrov v. Todd W. Blanche

── Bato Petrov v. Todd W. Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Date: April 14, 2026 Category: General In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ Nos. 20-3517 & 22-3114 BATO PETROV, Petitioner, v. TODD W. BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General of the United States, Respondent. ____________________ Petitions for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. No. A020-987-580. ____________________ ARGUED JANUARY 27, 2026 — DECIDED APRIL 14, 2026 ____________________ Before RIPPLE, SCUDDER, and KIRSCH, Circuit Judges. SCUDDER, Circuit Judge. Bato Petrov is a stateless native of Germany who sought cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1), contending that his removal will cause excep- tional and extremely unusual hardship to his United States citizen relatives. An immigration judge concluded that Pe- trov’s evidence fell short of this demanding standard and de- nied his application. The Board of Immigration Appeals 2 Nos. 20-3517 & 22-3114 affirmed and then denied Petrov’s subsequent motion to reo- pen the removal proceedings. Petrov now seeks relief in our court. Seeing no errors, we deny his petition for review. I Petrov was born in Germany but identifies as a stateless gypsy. In 1974, at about the age of one, he illegally entered the United States and has lived here ever since. Petrov has been with Helen Owens, a United States citizen, since the 1990s, and the couple married in 2013. They live in Chicago with their three children, all United States citizens. Petrov’s parents also live in Chicago, and his father is a United States citizen. In January 2014, Petrov filed an application for asylum, which the United States Citizenship and Immigration Ser- vices denied. Later in 2014, the Department of Homeland Se- curity served Petrov with a Notice to Appear and initiated re- moval proceedings against him under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) for having entered the United States with- out admission or parole. Petrov conceded removability, and the agency designated Germany as his county of removal. Petrov then sought cancellation of removal under § 1229b(b). A hearing followed before an immigration judge, and Petrov and his wife both testified. They explained that Petrov was the sole breadwinner for his household, that his family was particularly close, and that he feared European racism against gypsies. The immigration judge denied Pe- trov’s application, and the Board of Immigration Appeals agreed, largely adopting the immigration judge’s decision. In March 2021, Petrov asked the Board to reopen his ap- plication, supplemented by additional evidence. For the first time, he introduced evidence that his wife suffers from Nos. 20-3517 & 22-3114 3 anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder. He also informed the Board that she endured a miscarriage in June 2018. Petrov submitted further evidence that two of his children and his father have medical conditions. Finally, he included articles reporting the lack of economic opportunity in Germany and ongoing bias there against gypsies. The Board denied Petrov’s motion to reopen. It concluded that some of his additional evidence existed and was available prior to the immigration judge’s initial hardship decision. Further, the Board found that the additional evidence, whether considered individually or cumulatively with the ex- isting record evidence, did not demonstrate prima facie eligi- bility for cancellation of removal under the hardship stand- ard. Petrov now petitions for our review. II A To qualify for