Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10601095
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Avelar v. Bondi
No. 10601095 · Decided June 9, 2025
No. 10601095·Ninth Circuit · 2025·
FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 9, 2025
Citation
No. 10601095
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 9 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CESAR AUGUSTO AVELAR, et al., No. 23-4043
Agency Nos.
Petitioners, A240-762-797
A240-762-798
v.
A240-762-711
A240-762-712
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General, A240-762-710
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 6, 2025**
Before: SANCHEZ, H.A. THOMAS, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
Cesar Augusto Avelar, Blanca Morena Palma-De Avelar, and their three
minor children are natives and citizens of El Salvador. They petition for review of
a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily dismissing
their appeal of an order of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Avelar’s and
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Palma-De Avelar’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).1 We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. “We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s summary
dismissal of an appeal.” Nolasco-Amaya v. Garland, 14 F.4th 1007, 1012 (9th Cir.
2021). We deny the petition.
1. In their brief, Petitioners offer no argument about the BIA’s summary
dismissal of their appeal. As such, Petitioners have forfeited any challenge to that
dismissal. See Hernandez v. Garland, 47 F.4th 908, 916 (9th Cir. 2022) (holding
that issues not “specifically and distinctly” argued in a party’s opening brief are
forfeited).
PETITION DENIED.2
1
Avelar’s and Palma-De Avelar’s children are derivative beneficiaries of
their asylum applications. Their children did not, however, file separate
applications for withholding of removal and CAT protection. See Ali v. Ashcroft,
394 F.3d 780, 782 n.1 (9th Cir. 2005) (stating that, unlike asylum, derivative relief
is not available with respect to withholding of removal or CAT protection).
2
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.
2 23-4043
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 9 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 9 2025 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CESAR AUGUSTO AVELAR, et al., No.
03A240-762-711 A240-762-712 PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General, A240-762-710 Respondent.
04MEMORANDUM* On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 6, 2025** Before: SANCHEZ, H.A.
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 9 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Avelar v. Bondi in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 9, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10601095 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.