Case Explained: TECUN JIMENEZ V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-09

The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order denying Wendy Carolina Tecun-Jimenez’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied a substantial evidence standard to the agency’s factual findings and de novo review to legal questions. The court held that the BIA correctly applied the legal standard for assessing persecution regarding harm suffered by a child, citing *Zhang v. Gonzales*. Substantial evidence supported the BIA’s determination that abuse by the petitioner’s father did not rise to the level of persecution due to insufficient evidence regarding the extent, frequency, or intensity of the assaults. Furthermore, the court found that the petitioner failed to exhaust her claim regarding past persecution by a gang member because she only argued such harm in the background section of her brief to the BIA without explicitly claiming it constituted past persecution, whereas she reserved arguments about the gang for future fear; under *Abebe v. Mukasey*, issues not raised and argued in the brief before the BIA are deemed unexhausted. Regarding future persecution, substantial evidence supported the finding that the petitioner lacked a well-founded fear, as her father had stopped drinking years prior and the alleged gang member did not know her name or seek her out, meaning she failed to demonstrate an individualized risk of harm despite generalized country conditions. Finally, the court affirmed the denial of CAT relief, finding that the record did not compel the conclusion that it was more likely than not that the petitioner would be tortured if removed to El Salvador under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). The practical consequence is that the BIA’s order denying all forms of relief remains in effect, and the petitioner’s petition for review is dismissed without oral argument.

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