The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a summary order on January 5, 2026, in the immigration case *Caisaguano-Quizhpi v. Bondi*, involving a family's challenge to decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The case was heard by a three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Denny Chin, Raymond J. Lohier Jr., and Alison J. Nathan at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse in New York City.
The petitioners in the case are Jose Hermel Caisaguano-Quizhpi, Rosa Elena Tene-Ortega, Fabian Mauri Caisaguano-Tene, and L.H.C., who appear to constitute a family unit based on their shared surnames. The respondent is Pamela Bondi, listed in her official capacity as United States Attorney General, indicating this case was filed during the current administration.
The case originated from proceedings before Immigration Judge Christensen and subsequently went through the Board of Immigration Appeals before reaching the Second Circuit. The multiple alien registration numbers referenced in the court documents (A201 281 707 and A220 969 214/215/216) suggest this is a complex family immigration matter involving multiple individuals with separate cases that have been consolidated for appeal.
Representing the petitioners is Matthew Krein of MacMurray & Associates, a New York-based immigration law firm. The government is represented by several attorneys from the Office of Immigration Litigation, including Brian M. Boynton, who serves as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Jonathan A. Robbins as Assistant Director, and Trial Attorney Roberta O. Roberts.
The Second Circuit issued its decision as a summary order rather than a full published opinion. According to the court's procedural notes, summary orders do not have precedential effect and cannot be cited as binding authority in future cases. However, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and the court's Local Rule 32.1.1 do permit citation to summary orders filed after January 1, 2007, provided they are cited to either the Federal Appendix or an electronic database with the notation "SUMMARY ORDER."
The court's rules also require that any party citing a summary order must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel, ensuring that all parties have access to the referenced decision even when it lacks precedential value.
Immigration cases frequently reach the federal appeals courts when immigrants challenge adverse decisions by immigration judges or the Board of Immigration Appeals. These cases often involve complex questions of immigration law, including eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against Torture, or other forms of relief from removal.
The involvement of multiple family members with different alien registration numbers suggests this case may involve derivative beneficiaries, where family members seek immigration benefits based on the principal applicant's case. Such cases often arise when families flee persecution or seek protection in the United States and must navigate the complex immigration system together.
The Second Circuit, which covers New York, Connecticut, and Vermont, handles a significant portion of the nation's immigration appeals due to the large immigrant populations in its jurisdiction, particularly in New York City. The court regularly issues summary orders in immigration cases where the legal issues are well-settled or the facts do not warrant a precedential decision.
While the specific details of the Second Circuit's ruling are not provided in the available court documents, the case represents one of many immigration matters that work their way through the federal court system. Immigration law continues to be an active area of litigation, with families and individuals seeking various forms of protection and relief from removal proceedings.
The case designation 24-146 indicates this was among the first cases docketed by the Second Circuit in 2024, suggesting the family has been in immigration proceedings for an extended period before reaching the federal appeals level. The timeline from initial immigration proceedings through the Board of Immigration Appeals to the Circuit Court typically spans several years.
This case also reflects the ongoing operation of the immigration court system and federal appeals process under the current administration, with cases continuing to move through the courts regardless of changes in immigration policy or enforcement priorities at the executive level.