Miranda-Santa Fe v. Bondi

── Miranda-Santa Fe v. Bondi ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: April 27, 2026 Category: General 23-8030 Miranda-Santa Fe v. Bondi BIA Drucker, IJ A220 446 847, 220 957 749 & 216 700 760/761 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. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 27th day of April, two thousand twenty-six. PRESENT: REENA RAGGI, RICHARD C. WESLEY, SARAH A. L. MERRIAM, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ JUAN ORLANDO MIRANDA-SANTA FE, MONICA PATRICIA ROLDAN- AYNAGUANO, B.O.M.-R., E.M.M.-R., * Petitioners, v. 23-8030 NAC *We refer to the minor petitioners by their initials only in this publicly accessible order. TODD BLANCHE, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, † Respondent. ____________________________________ FOR PETITIONERS: Michael Borja, Borja Law Firm, P.C., Jackson Heights, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Corey L. Farrell, Senior Litigation Counsel; Sarah L. Martin, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is DENIED. Petitioners Juan Orlando Miranda-Santa Fe (“Miranda”), Monica Patricia Roldan-Aynaguano, and their minor children, all natives and citizens of Ecuador, seek review of a November 16, 2023 decision of the BIA affirming an August 23, 2022 decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Miranda’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 1 In re Miranda-Santa Fe, Nos. A 220 446 847, 220 957 749 & 216 700 †The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the caption as set forth above. 1 We principally refer to Miranda because the remaining petitioners were derivative beneficiaries of his asylum claim and did not file independent 2 760/761 (B.I.A. Nov. 16, 2023), aff’g Nos. A 220 446 847, 220 957 749 & 216 700 760/761 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Aug. 23, 2022). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history. We review the IJ’s decision as modified and supplemented by the BIA. 2 See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005); Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). We review factual findings “under the substantial evidence standard,” and we review questions of law and the applica