Prado-Majano v. Blanche

── Prado-Majano v. Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Date: May 07, 2026 Category: Immigration Case: 25-60040 Document: 97-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/07/2026 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED No. 25-60040 May 7, 2026 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Moises Alexander Prado-Majano, Petitioner, versus Todd Wallace Blanche, Acting U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. ______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A220 304 422 ______________________________ Before Richman, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Kurt D. Engelhardt, Circuit Judge: Moises Alexander Prado-Majano is an asylum seeker from El Salvador. Throughout his immigration proceedings, he filed three motions with the Board of Immigration Appeals. At issue here is the Board’s denial of his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. Because Prado-Majano’s motion to reopen was untimely and not subject to any exception or equitable tolling, we deny his petition for review. Case: 25-60040 Document: 97-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/07/2026 No. 25-60040 I. In May 2022, Prado-Majano, a native of El Salvador, entered the United States without being admitted or paroled and without a valid entry document. After being placed in removal proceedings, Prado-Majano sought asylum and other forms of relief. Prado-Majano testified that he was forced to join the MS-13 gang. After four years, MS-13 allowed him to leave its membership, but forcibly tattooed him so that he could be later identified by it or a rival gang. Prado- Majano recounted being twice wrongly detained and tortured by Salvadoran police and an extermination group’s 1 attempt to kill him for his gang affiliation. The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied all relief and ordered Prado- Majano removed to El Salvador. While on appeal with the Board, the Department of Homeland Security inadvertently disclosed Prado-Majano’s personally identifiable information online. Prado-Majano moved the Board to remand his case so that he could pursue a claim based on the inadvertent disclosure. The Board affirmed the IJ’s decision and remanded for the IJ to determine Prado- Majano’s eligibility for deferral of removal. Back in front of the IJ, Prado-Majano’s counsel withdrew his application for relief because Prado-Majano claimed to be a citizen of Mexico. The IJ permitted him to withdraw his application for relief and ordered him removed to Mexico, or in the alternative, El Salvador. Prado-Majano, proceeding pro se, again appealed to the Board, arguing that his counsel acted without his consent in withdrawing his application. He _____________________ 1 “Extermination groups” work with police and gangs to conduct arbitrary detentions and killings. 2  Case: 25-60040 Document: 97-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/07/2026 No. 25-60040 then filed a motion to remand based on previously unavailable evidence showing he was entitled to relief. The Board dismissed Prado-Majano’s appeal and denied his motion to remand. In July 2024, Prado-Majano moved to reopen his immigra