Did you have a bad lawyer who could have performed better? A person claimed ineffective assistance of counsel because of the lawyer’s conduct, who only asked 4 brief questions about hardship since he applied for cancellation of removal which largely relies on hardship. The Second Circuit court ruled in favor of the immigrant stating that the Board of Immigration Appeals applied an incorrect standard when reviewing the petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim, namely by applying a heightened legal standard in evaluating whether he was prejudiced by his prior counsel’s conduct. The court also found that the BIA overlooked and mischaracterized the petitioner’s new hardship evidence, and failed to follow precedent when denying his request for remand while awaiting the adjudication of his U visa application.