Maria Vasquez-Mebo v. Todd Blanche

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1745 Doc: 22 Filed: 05/14/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1745

MARIA GLORIA VASQUEZ-MEBO, Petitioner, v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General, Respondent.

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

Submitted: March 16, 2026 Decided: May 14, 2026

Before THACKER, RICHARDSON, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Maria Gloria Vasquez-Mebo, Petitioner Pro Se. Rachel Louise Browning, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 24-1745 Doc: 22 Filed: 05/14/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Maria Gloria Vasquez-Mebo, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision denying the relief of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and ordering her removal from the United States.

We have considered Vasquez-Mebo’s challenges to the denial of deferral of removal under the CAT. To be granted that relief, Vasquez-Mebo must demonstrate that it is more likely than not that she will be tortured if she returns to Peru. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2) (2025). Because this Court reviews the denial of relief under the CAT for substantial evidence, “[t]he agency’s ‘findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’” Nasrallah v. Bar, 590 U.S. 573, 584 (2020) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). Relevant legal determinations are subject to de novo review. Turkson v. Holder, 667 F.3d 523, 527 (4th Cir. 2012). Upon review, we find that the record evidence does not compel reversal of the agency’s denial of relief.

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. In re Vasquez-Mebo (B.I.A. July 12, 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