Ramirez-Rojas v. Bondi

── Ramirez-Rojas v. Bondi ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: April 08, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-9550 Document: 26 Date Filed: 04/08/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT April 8, 2026 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court LADY CARLINA RAMIREZ-ROJAS; JUAN RAUL MORA-RAMIREZ; LYANNE CELESTE MORA-RAMIREZ, Petitioners, v. No. 25-9550 (Petition for Review) TODD BLANCHE, ∗ Acting United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT ∗∗ _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, BALDOCK, and MORITZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ On April 2, 2026, Todd Blanche became Acting Attorney General. ∗ Consequently, his name has been substituted for Pamela J. Bondi as Attorney General, per Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined ∗∗ unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.  Appellate Case: 25-9550 Document: 26 Date Filed: 04/08/2026 Page: 2 Lady Carlina Ramirez-Rojas petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) order denying her motion to reopen her removal proceedings. 1 We deny in part and dismiss in part her petition for review. I. BACKGROUND Petitioner is a native and citizen of Colombia who entered the United States without inspection in January 2023. The Department of Homeland Security commenced removal proceedings against Petitioner by filing a Notice to Appear (NTA) with the Denver Immigration Court. Through counsel, Petitioner admitted the factual allegations and conceded removability as charged in the NTA. Based on her admissions and concession, the immigration judge (IJ) found her removable. Seeking relief from removal, Petitioner applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. In 2024, the IJ held a hearing on the merits of Petitioner’s application. The IJ subsequently denied relief and ordered her removal. Petitioner’s appeal to the BIA was due by September 13, 2024. Her counsel attempted to file an appeal on the deadline, but the BIA rejected it due to filing defects. A few days later, Petitioner’s counsel again attempted to file an appeal, and the BIA again rejected it due to filing defects. On November 8, 2024, Petitioner’s counsel filed a corrected appeal and a motion to accept the late filing. On December 5, 2024, finding that the motion failed 1 Petitioner’s minor son and daughter are derivative beneficiaries of her asylum application. They present no claims or arguments distinct from hers. 2  Appellate Case: 25-9550 Document: 26 Date Filed: 04/08/2026 Page: 3 to explain the delay in refiling and did not establish that equitable to