Siguencia-Llamuca v. Blanche

── Siguencia-Llamuca v. Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Date: May 04, 2026 Category: General 23-7757 Siguencia-Llamuca v. Blanche BIA Perl, IJ A220 574 890 A220 969 876/877 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 4th day of May, two thousand twenty- six. PRESENT: JON O. NEWMAN, JOSÉ A. CABRANES, WILLIAM J. NARDINI, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ HOLGER LEONEL SIGUENCIA- LLAMUCA, JOHANNA BEATRIZ LEMA- PUMAQUERO, IAN LEONEL SIGUENCIA-LEMA, Petitioners, v. 23-7757 NAC TODD BLANCHE, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL,  Respondent. _____________________________________ FOR PETITIONERS: Michael Borja, Borja Law Firm, P.C., Jackson Heights, NY. FOR RESPONDENT: Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General; Holly M. Smith, Assistant Director; Sarah K. Pergolizzi, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, 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 Holger Leonel Siguencia-Llamuca, Johanna Beatriz Lema- Pumaquero, and their minor child, natives and citizens of Ecuador, seek review of a November 1, 2023, decision of the BIA affirming a November 15, 2022, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Holger Leonel Siguencia- Llamuca, et al., Nos. A220 574 890, A220 969 876/877 (B.I.A. Nov. 1, 2023), aff’g Nos. A220 574 890, A220 969 876/877 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Nov. 15, 2022). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 2  We have reviewed “the judgment of the IJ as modified by the BIA’s decision,” minus the grounds the BIA did not reach. Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). We review fact-finding, including a determination of whether there is a nexus between the alleged persecution and a protected ground, under the substantial evidence standard. See Edimo-Doualla v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 276, 282 (2d Cir. 2006); see also Hong Fei Gao v. Sessions, 891 F.3d 67, 76 (2d Cir. 2018). “[T]he administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonab