Diaz Pulig v. Blanche

── Diaz Pulig v. Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: April 10, 2026 Category: General 24-2359 Diaz Pulig v. Blanche BIA Chung, IJ A246 265 111/112/113 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second 2 Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley 3 Square, in the City of New York, on the 10th day of April, two thousand 4 twenty-six. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 REENA RAGGI, 8 JOSEPH F. BIANCO, 9 MARIA ARAÚJO KAHN, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 JOSSELYN DANIELA DIAZ PULIG, 14 N.J.A.D., D.J.A.D., 15 Petitioners, 16 17 v. 24-2359 18 NAC 19 TODD BLANCHE, ACTING UNITED 20 STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 21 Respondent.* 22 _____________________________________ * The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to amend the caption as set forth above. 1 FOR PETITIONERS: Reuben S. Kerben, Esq., Kerben Law Firm, 2 P.C., Kew Gardens, NY. 3 4 FOR RESPONDENT: Yaakov M. Roth, Acting Assistant Attorney 5 General; Robert D. Tennyson, Senior 6 Litigation Counsel; Remi Da Rocha-Afodu, 7 Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration 8 Litigation, United States Department of 9 Justice, Washington, DC. 10 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of 11 Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND 12 DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. 13 Petitioners Josselyn Daniela Diaz Pulig and her two minor children, natives 14 and citizens of Ecuador, seek review of an August 23, 2024, decision of the BIA 15 affirming an April 11, 2024, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Diaz 16 Pulig’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the 17 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 1 In re Diaz Pulig, et al., Nos. A246-265- 1 We principally refer to Diaz Pulig because her children are derivative asylum beneficiaries and did not file independent applications. We do not address the merits of Diaz Pulig’s CAT claim because it is both abandoned and unexhausted, as she does not challenge either the BIA’s determination that she waived that claim by failing to address it on appeal or the IJ’s finding that she failed to meet her burden of proof. See Vera Punin v. Garland, 108 F.4th 114, 124 (2d Cir. 2024) (“[W]hen an argument made to this Court cannot be closely matched up with a specific argument made to the BIA, it has not been properly exhausted and we canno