Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 10597549
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Herrera-Cuyuch v. Bondi
No. 10597549 · Decided June 3, 2025
No. 10597549·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 3, 2025
Citation
No. 10597549
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
LIDIA MARIA HERRERA-CUYUCH; et No. 24-7742
al., Agency Nos.
A203-472-193
Petitioners, A203-472-194
v.
MEMORANDUM*
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted May 21, 2025**
Before: SILVERMAN, LEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
Lidia Maria Herrera-Cuyuch and her minor son, natives and citizens of
Guatemala, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’
(“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ’s”)
decision denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, 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).
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings. Arrey v. Barr, 916 F.3d 1149, 1157 (9th Cir. 2019). We deny the petition
for review.
Petitioners do not challenge the BIA’s conclusion that they waived review of
the IJ’s dispositive past persecution and likelihood of future persecution
determinations. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir.
2013) (issues not raised in the opening brief are forfeited).
Thus, petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection
because petitioners failed to show it is more likely than not they will be tortured by
or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala.
See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.
The motion to stay removal is otherwise denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 24-7742
Plain English Summary
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
Key Points
01NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
02COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LIDIA MARIA HERRERA-CUYUCH; et No.
03On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted May 21, 2025** Before: SILVERMAN, LEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
04Lidia Maria Herrera-Cuyuch and her minor son, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ’s”) decision denying the
Frequently Asked Questions
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 3 2025 MOLLY C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Herrera-Cuyuch v. Bondi in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 3, 2025.
Use the citation No. 10597549 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.