9th Cir.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Every decision we've summarized from United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Apr 24 2026
24-7000 Unpublished

SINGH V. BLANCHE

The Ninth Circuit denied Gurpreet Singh's petition for review of his asylum and withholding of removal claims because he failed to exhaust administrative remedies regarding an adverse credibility determination. The court further held that Singh lacked sufficient independent corroborating evidence to prove he faced a well-founded fear of persecution.

Apr 24 2026
23-195 Unpublished

OCHOA ORDONEZ V. BLANCHE

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision rejecting a time-barred motion to reopen removal proceedings. The court upheld the BIA's finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate material changes in Guatemala's country conditions sufficient to trigger the statutory exception.

Apr 24 2026
2:24-cv-01909-BJR Unpublished

WHISPER LAKE DEVELOPMENTS, INC. V. MAHAFFIE, ET AL.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a developer's federal constitutional claims, holding that the plaintiff failed to allege a constitutionally protected property interest in the disputed land or contractual payments. The court reasoned that the plaintiff conveyed legal title to the property and that the contract language did not create a legitimate claim of entitlement to payment for a specific number of lots.

Apr 24 2026
8:24-cv-02232-DDP-KES Unpublished

Nourbakhsh, Et Al. v. Rubio

The Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded a district court order after intervening visa developments mooted the original delay claim. The appellate court directed the lower court to address new legal questions regarding administrative processing and a Presidential Proclamation refusal.

Apr 24 2026
22-1280 Unpublished

VAZQUEZ-TRUJILLO V. BLANCHE

The Ninth Circuit denied Lorena Vazquez-Trujillo's petition for review of her asylum and withholding of removal claims, ruling that her proposed social group lacks the required legal particularity. The court upheld the agency's finding that women of low socio-economic status in Mexico are too amorphous to constitute a cognizable particular social group.

Apr 24 2026
2:25-cv-01823-KKE Unpublished

Nguyen v. U.S. Bank National Association, et al.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed an appeal regarding the denial of a temporary restraining order in a foreclosure dispute. The court held that the denial of a temporary restraining order is not reviewable on appeal unless it is tantamount to the denial of a preliminary injunction.

Apr 24 2026
3:13-cr-00358-BTM-2 Unpublished

USA v. Mendoza

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of a writ of error coram nobis, holding that the defendant failed to prove prejudice from his counsel's alleged failure to warn him of immigration consequences. The court ruled that without contemporaneous evidence showing the defendant would have rationally rejected the plea to proceed to trial, the fundamental error standard was not met.

Apr 24 2026
25-808 Unpublished

HURTADO PEREZ V. BLANCHE

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision rejecting an asylum claim based on the petitioner's status as a witness to crime or family member of a victim. The court held that the record failed to show Salvadoran society recognizes these categories as socially distinct particular social groups under controlling precedent.

Apr 24 2026
3:24-cr-05054-DGE-1 Unpublished

USA v. Cannarozzi

The Ninth Circuit affirmed a restitution order requiring a drug seller to compensate the estate of a purchaser who died from drug consumption. The court held that a buyer who consumes drugs for personal use is a valid victim under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act and not a participant in the offense.

Apr 24 2026
2:19-cv-08989-MWF-JC Unpublished

HILL V. DIAZ, ET AL.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a prisoner's Section 1983 claim challenging his removal from a religious diet program. The court held that the plaintiff failed to allege facts supporting a sincerely held religious belief or sufficient supervisory liability.