USCA4 Appeal: 24-1687 Doc: 27 Filed: 08/07/2025 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1687

ESTELA YAMILETH GUTIERREZ SILVA; B.G.G.S., Petitioners, v. PAMELA JO BONDI, Attorney General, Respondent.

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

Submitted: July 1, 2025 Decided: August 7, 2025

Before KING, HEYTENS, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Donald L. Schlemmer, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Kohsei Ugumori, Senior Litigation Counsel, Spencer S. Shucard, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 24-1687 Doc: 27 Filed: 08/07/2025 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Estela Yamileth Gutierrez Silva and her minor child, natives and citizens of El Salvador, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing Gutierrez Silva’s appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The Board held that Gutierrez Silva waived review of a dispositive ruling regarding asylum and withholding of removal and, upon review, we agree. As the Attorney General has properly invoked the exhaustion requirement specified in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1), we decline to review the asylum and withholding of removal claims. ∗ See Santos-Zacaria v. Garland, 598 U.S. 411, 413, 419 (2023); Trejo Tepas v. Garland, 73 F.4th 208, 213-14 (4th Cir. 2023). Next, we have considered Gutierrez Silva’s challenge to the denial of CAT protection and conclude that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief. Cabrera Vasquez v. Barr, 919 F.3d 218, 222 (4th Cir. 2019) (stating standard of review). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. In re Gutierrez Silva (B.I.A.

June 28, 2024). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

∗ Although Gutierrez Silva contends the Board erred by failing to consider her son’s asylum claim, he is a derivative beneficiary on her application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(3)(A).