Case Explained: SEYDI LOPEZ CARDONA, ET AL V. TODD BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-29 The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision upholding an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) for Seydi Iveth Lopez-Cardona and her two derivative minor children. The court applied the substantial evidence standard to review the agency’s adverse credibility determination and the denial of relief. The court held that substantial evidence supported the immigration judge’s finding that Lopez-Cardona was not credible due to material inconsistencies in her testimony regarding key incidents, specifically an incident where her home was set on fire. The court noted that while her initial declaration stated she saw two men running away, her later testimony identified her alleged persecutor, Osman, among a group fleeing the scene; this omission was material because it would have strengthened her claim of persecution. The court found the petitioner’s explanation of forgetting or being confused unpersuasive. Furthermore, the court noted that in the absence of credible testimony, Lopez-Cardona failed to provide reasonably available corroborating evidence regarding abuse suffered by family members residing in California. Regarding the CAT claim, the court ruled that because the underlying statements were found not credible, they could not support a finding of a likelihood of future torture, and no other evidence in the record compelled such a finding. The practical consequence is that the petition for review is denied, leaving in place the immigration judge’s order denying relief and the BIA’s affirmance. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.