The First Circuit Court of Appeals issued an immigration ruling with an unusual procedural twist after the death of a participating judge forced the remaining two panelists to complete the case under federal law provisions for reduced panels.

In *Khanal v. Bondi*, the court reviewed a petition by Niranjan Khanal and Gita Khanal, both citizens of Nepal, seeking to vacate a Board of Immigration Appeals order that dismissed their claims for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The case, numbered 14-1572, had been pending since 2014.

Judge Bruce Selya participated in oral arguments and initial deliberations before his death on Feb. 22, 2025, ended his involvement in the case. The remaining Circuit Judges Montecalvo and Kayatta issued the opinion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d), which allows two-judge panels to decide cases when a third judge becomes unavailable.

The case highlights both the personal challenges faced by asylum seekers and the procedural complexities that can arise in federal appellate litigation. The Khanals challenged the BIA's decision, which had adopted an Immigration Judge's ruling that focused largely on credibility determinations regarding their asylum claims.

The procedural continuation under § 46(d) demonstrates the federal judiciary's mechanisms for ensuring case resolution even when unforeseen circumstances interrupt the normal three-judge appellate process. This statutory provision prevents cases from being indefinitely delayed due to judicial unavailability.