9th Cir.

Blanca Soto v. Todd Blanche

June 29, 2026 ·21-70295 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision dismissing an asylum claim. The court found substantial evidence supported the lower courts adverse credibility determination and subsequent denials.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:15

Background

Blanca Soto, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitioned for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing her appeal of an Immigration Judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The Immigration Judge had made an adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between Soto’s declaration and her testimony.

The court’s reasoning

The panel reviewed the adverse credibility determination for substantial evidence and found the Board of Immigration Appeals correctly relied on the Immigration Judge’s opinion. The court noted that Soto testified her brother was kidnapped but failed to mention this in her declaration because she did not think it was convenient. The court held that such inconsistencies at the heart of the claim undermined her credibility. Consequently, there was insufficient evidence to establish eligibility for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying a continuance for a U-Visa application, noting Soto had received multiple continuances previously and the U-Visa process was uncertain.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, and the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing Soto’s claims is affirmed. Soto remains free to pursue her U-Visa application outside of removal proceedings.