We have repeatedly rejected similar arguments that the Board failed to consider the totality of the evidence when its opinion proved otherwise. See Sustaita-Lopez v. Garland, 2024 WL 509619, at *3 (6th Cir. Feb. 9, 2024); Garcia Zapata, 2022 WL 2070666, at *2; Cano-Morales v. Garland, 2022 WL 304953, at *4 (6th Cir. Feb. 2, 2022); Contreras-Sanchez v. Garland, 2021 WL 2926133, at *3 n.4 (6th Cir. July 12, 2021); Araujo-Padilla v. Garland, 854 Fed.Appx. 646, 650 (6th Cir. 2021). The argument fares no better in this case.

In Cano-Morales v. Garland, this Court considered whether depriving children of special education services rose to the level of exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. No. 21-3070, 2022 WL 304953, at *3 (6th Cir. Feb. 2, 2022). But that argument failed because the petitioner could not show that "his children would be deprived of all schooling or of an opportunity to obtain any education."