Case Explained: PEDRO RAMIREZ-GASPAR V. TODD BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-29 The Ninth Circuit denied Pedro Ramirez-Gaspar’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision rejecting his applications for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court applied de novo review to questions of law and reviewed factual findings, including the agency’s ultimate determinations on these claims, under the substantial evidence standard. Regarding withholding of removal, the court held that substantial evidence supported the denial because the record did not compel a finding of past persecution; Ramirez-Gaspar alleged only four threatening phone calls in 2013 without physical harm to himself or his family, which is insufficient to constitute persecution or establish a presumption of future persecution. Furthermore, the court found that Ramirez-Gaspar forfeited any challenge to the agency’s determination regarding the nexus to a protected ground by failing to specifically argue it in his opening brief. Regarding CAT protection, the court affirmed the denial based on substantial evidence showing Ramirez-Gaspar was not tortured in the past and that his family remains safe in Guatemala. The only evidence of continued interest in him was a non-threatening phone call to his daughter in 2016, which did not compel a conclusion that he faced a likelihood of torture upon return. As a result of this ruling, Ramirez-Gasbar’s motion for a stay of removal is denied as moot. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.