9th Cir.

Jimenez Martinez v. Blanche

June 2, 2026 ·22-1527 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order. The court found substantial evidence supported the agency's denial of cancellation of removal, asylum, and related protections.

Background

Jonathan Jimenez Martinez sought review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s decision. The lower tribunal denied cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the agency’s factual findings for substantial evidence and constitutional claims de novo. It found substantial evidence supported the determination that the petitioner did not show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to qualifying relatives. The court also found substantial evidence supported the denial of asylum because the petitioner failed to show past harm or a reasonable possibility of future persecution. Withholding of removal failed because the petitioner was ineligible for asylum. The court further found substantial evidence supported the denial of Convention Against Torture protection because the petitioner failed to show it was more likely than not he would be tortured. The court rejected the due process claim, noting the petitioner failed to demonstrate both a violation of rights and prejudice.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, leaving the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order denying relief intact.