Cerna v. Bondi - Immigration Appeal Denied

4th Circuit Daily Opinions

Filed February 18th, 2026

Detected February 19th, 2026

Summary

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for review filed by Ivan Remberto Cerna. The court found that substantial evidence supported the Board of Immigration Appeals' ruling that the immigration judge erred in granting deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture.

View original document View source feed page

What changed

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied a petition for review in the case of Ivan Remberto Cerna v. Pamela Jo Bondi. The court affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision, which vacated an immigration judge's grant of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The appellate court found that the Board correctly determined the immigration judge committed clear error in making predictive factual findings and that the Board properly reviewed the legal rulings de novo.

This unpublished opinion is not binding precedent in the Fourth Circuit. For regulated entities, this means the specific outcome of this case does not set a new legal standard. However, it reinforces the appellate standard of review for immigration appeals and the Board's authority to review immigration judge decisions. No new compliance actions are required based on this specific ruling, but it serves as an example of how such appeals are adjudicated.

Source document (simplified)

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF AP PEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24 - 1910 IVAN REMBERTO CERN A, Petitioner, v. PAMELA JO BONDI, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the B oard of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: January 22, 2026 Decided: February 18, 2026 Before AGEE, RICHARDSON, a nd HEYTENS, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublishe d per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Adam Solow, SOLOW, HARTNETT & GALVA N, LLC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Petitioner. Brett A. Shumate, Acting Assistant A ttorney General, Anthony C. Payne, Christopher Ian Pryby, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT O F JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding p recedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM: Ivan Remberto Cerna, a native and citizen o f El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immig ration Appeals (“Board”) sustaining the Department of Homeland Security’s appeal and vacating the immigration judge’s oral decision granting Cerna deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition for review. Upon review of the record, including the transcript of Cerna’s merits h earing and all supporting evidence, we conclude that substantial evid ence supports the Board’s ruling that the immigration judge committed clear e rror in reaching the relevan t predictive factual findings. See Colorado Navarro v. Bondi, 14 8 F.4th 182, 190, 192 (4t h Cir. 20 25) (explaining standard of review in this procedural context and observing th at, while not conclusively dispo siti ve on their o wn, statistics can “prov ide substantial evidence . . . to support the BIA on the likelihood of torture in prison”). Nor d o we discern legal error in the Board’s reversal decision in that the Bo ard properly reviewed the immigration judge’s legal rulings de novo. I d. at 190; see also In re A -A-R, 29 I. & N. Dec. 38, 41 (B.I.A. 2025) (“ [W] hether a predicted factual outcome meets the definition of ‘to rture’ is a question of law that the Board properly considers de novo.” (citation modified)). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. S ee In re Cerna (B.I.A. July 12, 2024). We dispense with oral argument becau se the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIE D