9th Cir.

Mamedova v. Blanche

June 25, 2026 ·25-5173 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing an asylum claim. The court found substantial evidence supported the agency's determination that the petitioner's fear of persecution in Russia was speculative and not objectively reasonable.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:27

Background

Angelina Mamedova, a native and citizen of Russia, petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing her appeal of an Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The Immigration Judge denied her claims, finding her fear of future persecution was not objectively reasonable.

The court’s reasoning

The Ninth Circuit reviewed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision for substantial evidence. The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s determination that Mamedova failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. The record showed that after Mamedova made a donation to a humanitarian organization in Ukraine, she was able to travel abroad, return voluntarily to Russia, and depart again without issue. Additionally, she had no personal contact with police, was not formally charged, and her mother was able to return to Russia without further contact from authorities. The court noted that while many people charged with treason were activists or journalists, Mamedova did not fall into these categories. The court also rejected arguments that the agency improperly discounted her testimony or failed to consider evidence, finding the agency had summarized her credible testimony and considered all evidence submitted.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, and the temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.