Elisa Lopez-Vasquez v. Pamela Bondi

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2440
___________________________
Duly Esther Sanchez-Rivera
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner
v.
Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General of the United States1
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
____________
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
____________
Submitted: May 4, 2026
Filed: May 7, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before GRUENDER, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
1Todd Blanche is automatically substituted as respondent in place of Pamela
Bondi pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c)(2).

-- 1 of 3 --

PER CURIAM.
Honduran citizen Duly Sanchez-Rivera petitions for review of an order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which dismissed her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her asylum and withholding of removal.2
Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no
basis to grant the petition. See Davila-Mejia v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 624, 627 (8th Cir.
2008) (standard of review). We conclude that Sanchez-Rivera failed to exhaust and
waived her challenges to the agency’s determinations that she did not demonstrate
any harm she suffered was on account of a cognizable particular social group. See
8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(a)(42)(A), 1158(b)(1); Santos-Zacaria v. Garland, 598 U.S. 411,
423 (2023) (exhaustion requirement in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1) is non-jurisdictional
claim-processing rule subject to waiver or forfeiture); Essel v. Garland, 89 F.4th 686,
691 (8th Cir. 2023) (enforcing court-imposed exhaustion requirement when
petitioner’s counsel failed to present argument to BIA); Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d
at 756. As the failure to establish a nexus to a cognizable social group is dispositive
of her asylum claim, this court declines to consider Sanchez-Rivera’s challenges
involving past persecution and a well-founded fear of future persecution. See
Miranda v. Sessions, 892 F.3d 940, 944 (8th Cir. 2018) (declining to review other
requirements for relief from removal when noncitizen’s particular social group was
not cognizable because noncitizen necessarily could not show any past or future
persecution would be on account of a protected ground); Baltti v. Sessions, 878 F.3d
240, 245 (8th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (holding nexus determination independently
2Sanchez-Rivera does not challenge the agency’s reasons for denying her
protection under the Convention Against Torture and humanitarian asylum.
Accordingly, any challenge has been waived. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367
F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004) (claim not raised or meaningfully argued in opening
brief is deemed waived).
-2-

-- 2 of 3 --

disposed of asylum claim). Finally, because Sanchez-Rivera did not meet the
standard for asylum, her claim for withholding of removal necessarily failed as well.
See Martin Martin v. Barr, 916 F.3d 1141, 1145 (8th Cir. 2019) (noncitizen who
cannot establish eligibility for asylum cannot meet more rigorous standard of proof
for withholding of removal).
Accordingly, the petition for review is denied.
______________________________
-3-

-- 3 of 3 --