Bondi

Lagunas Espinoza v. Bondi

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 13, 202523-3883California830 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 13 2025

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

FABIAN LAGUNAS ESPINOZA; MARIA No. 23-3883 ANGELICA FLORES ULLOA; FABIAN Agency Nos.

LAGUNAS FLORES; MATEO LAGUNAS A220-589-087

FLORES, A220-589-088

A220-589-089

Petitioners,

A220-589-090

v.

MEMORANDUM*

PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 11, 2025** Pasadena, California

Before: PAEZ, IKUTA, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

Fabian Lagunas Espinoza, María Flores Ulloa, and their two children

(“Petitioners”) seek asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).1 An immigration judge denied their claims,

and the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.