Case Explained: MERLI VALDEZ-MERIDA V. TODD BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-06

The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review filed by Merli Carolina Valdez-Merida, a Guatemalan national seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court held that the petitioner forfeited her claims for asylum and withholding of removal because she failed to meaningfully challenge the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination regarding the lack of nexus between the proposed harm and her membership in the particular social group of “women in Guatemala who are defenseless.” Under Ninth Circuit precedent, arguments not raised in an opening brief or presented only as conclusory statements in a reply brief are forfeited, and the court declined to exercise its discretion to address the issue. Regarding the CAT claim, the court applied the substantial evidence standard of review and affirmed the BIA’s denial because the petitioner failed to establish that it was more likely than not she would be tortured if removed to Guatemala with the consent or acquiescence of a public official. The court found that neither the petitioner’s limited country conditions evidence nor her explanation for failing to report harassment to the police was sufficient to demonstrate government acquiescence, noting that generalized evidence of violence and crime does not satisfy this requirement. Consequently, the petition is denied in its entirety, leaving the BIA’s order denying all forms of relief in effect.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.