Karen Orellana-Alvarado v. Todd Blanche

── Karen Orellana-Alvarado v. Todd Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: June 08, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 25-1551 Doc: 43 Filed: 06/08/2026 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 25-1551 KAREN JOHANA ORELLANA-ALVARADO, Petitioner, v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: April 24, 2026 Decided: June 8, 2026 Before QUATTLEBAUM, BENJAMIN, and BERNER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Alaina Taylor, Megan Herndon, MURRAY OSORIO PLLC, Fairfax, Virginia, for Petitioner. Brett A. Shumate, Assistant Attorney General, Bernard A. Joseph, Karen L. Melnik, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 25-1551 Doc: 43 Filed: 06/08/2026 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Karen Johana Orellana-Alvarado, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition for review. We will affirm the agency’s determination regarding an applicant’s eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal if it is supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole. I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). “[A]dministrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Legal issues, however, are reviewed de novo. Li Fang Lin v. Mukasey, 517 F.3d 685, 691–92 (4th Cir. 2008). Here, the Board agreed with the IJ that Orellana-Alvarado failed to show that the Honduran government was unable or unwilling to protect her from her former partner. “When an applicant claims that she fears persecution by a private actor, she must also show that the government in her native country is unable or unwilling to control her persecutor.” Diaz de Gomez v. Wilkinson, 987 F.3d 359, 365 (4th Cir. 2021) (citation modified). “Whether a government is unable or unwilling to control private actors is a factual question that must be resolved based on the record in each case.” Crespin-Valladares v. Holder, 632 F.3d 117, 128 (4th Cir. 2011) (citation modified). There is “not a per se requirement that an applicant [must] have reported [ ] past persecution to police” if the applicant 2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-1551 Doc: 43 Filed: 06/08/2026 Pg: 3 of 3 demonstrates that seeking such assistance would have been futile or subjected her to further abuse. Marquez v. Bondi, 160 F.4th 418, 428 (4th Cir. 2025). Orellana-Alvarado claimed in her petition and in her testimony that she did not seek police protection because the Honduran police only help wealthy people. 1 Upon review of the record, considered in conjunction with the relevant authorities and the issues raised in this court, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the agency’s ruling that Orellana- Alvarado failed to establish that the Honduran g