Jose Daniel De Paz Mejia v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General

24-2254Court of Appeals for the Fourth CircuitJun 11, 2026

Full text

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-2254
JOSE DANIEL DE PAZ MEJIA,
Petitioner,
v.
TODD BLANCHE, Acting Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: May 18, 2026 Decided: June 11, 2026
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jose Daniel de Paz Mejia, Petitioner Pro Se. Shelley Kay-Glenn Clemens, Keith Ian
McManus, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Jose Daniel de Paz Mejia, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review
of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the
Immigration Judge’s decision denying the relief of deferral of removal under the
Convention Against Torture (CAT) and ordering his removal from the United States.
To be granted the relief of deferral of removal, Petitioner must demonstrate that it
is more likely than not that he will be tortured if he returns to El Salvador. 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 de Paz Mejia (B.I.A. Nov. 21,
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

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.