Case Explained: RAMIREZ-CANSECO V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-26 The ninth-circuit denied Pablo Marcos Ramirez-Canseco’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The court held that Ramirez-Canseco waived challenges to the denial of cancellation of removal and failed to exhaust administrative remedies regarding the merits of his asylum and withholding of removal claims by not raising them before the BIA, rendering those contentions properly outside the scope of judicial review under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1). Regarding his claim for protection under the Convention Against Torture, the court applied a substantial evidence standard and found that the agency’s denial was supported by the record because Ramirez-Canseco failed to demonstrate it was more likely than not that he would be tortured upon return to Mexico. Consequently, the petition is denied, and the motion to stay removal is dismissed as moot. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.