Case Explained: GRACIELA PULIDO-CHAVEZ V. TODD BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-26 The Ninth Circuit denied Graciela Pulido-Chavez’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) decision denying her third motion to reopen. The court applied a standard of review where factual findings are assessed for substantial evidence and legal questions are reviewed de novo, while evaluating the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen for abuse of discretion. The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that Pulido-Chavez failed to meet the requirements for an untimely, number-barred third motion to reopen because she did not submit evidence of changed country conditions in Mexico at the time she was ordered removed, despite presenting evidence of increased violence against women in the years prior. Furthermore, the court found substantial evidence supporting the BIA’s determination that Pulido-Chavez failed to establish prima facie eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal, as her fear stemmed from generalized violence rather than targeted persecution on account of a protected ground, and she could safely relocate within Mexico. Additionally, the court affirmed that substantial evidence supported the denial of protection under the Convention Against Torture, as the record did not compel a conclusion that she was more likely than not to be tortured by or with the acquiescence of the Mexican government. As a practical consequence, the petition for review is denied, and the BIA’s order denying the motion to reopen remains in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.