Case Explained: RODAS ZAFRA V. BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-22 The ninth-circuit granted the petition for review and remanded the case to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) for further proceedings. The court held that the BIA abused its discretion by summarily dismissing Andrea Milagros Rodas Zafra’s appeal without providing a reasoned explanation for denying her motion for equitable tolling based on her counsel’s sudden illness. The court applied the standard of review for abuse of discretion, which prohibits arbitrary or irrational actions and requires the agency to provide a reasoned explanation for its decisions. Under the equitable tolling test derived from *Holland v. Florida*, a petitioner must demonstrate diligent pursuit of rights and an extraordinary circumstance preventing timely filing. The court emphasized that because equitable tolling is a highly fact-dependent inquiry, the BIA must explain its determinations to permit meaningful appellate review. Although the BIA concluded that the motion did not set forth extraordinary circumstances, it failed to address why the counsel’s admitted illness and inaction did not constitute such a circumstance. As a practical consequence, the case is sent back to the BIA to provide a detailed explanation regarding the equitable tolling claim. Additionally, the court granted Rodas Zafra’s motion to stay removal pending the issuance of the mandate. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.