The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Victor Manuel Cerritos Rivas's petition for review of an immigration court decision that rejected his asylum application, according to an unpublished per curiam opinion filed January 9, 2026.

The three-judge panel, consisting of Circuit Judges J. Harvie Wilkinson III and Ryan Benjamin, along with Senior Circuit Judge William Traxler Jr., unanimously denied the petition after finding no reversible error in the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision. The board had previously upheld an immigration judge's denial of Cerritos Rivas's applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

Cerritos Rivas, born in Sensuetepeque, El Salvador, in 1980, fled his homeland following threats and violence that began when he was just an infant. According to court documents, when Cerritos Rivas was two months old, his father was murdered by Raul Morales, who wanted the family's land and cattle. Morales subsequently threatened the petitioner's mother, Maria De Derivas, telling her that if she did not leave the area, he would make her and her children "disappear."

Fearing for their lives, De Derivas buried her husband and immediately fled with her children, including Cerritos Rivas and two daughters, along with her sister and mother. The family relocated to San Juan Opico, another city in El Salvador approximately six hours away from their original home.

The case was argued before the Fourth Circuit on August 14, 2025, with the court taking nearly five months to issue its decision. Jorge E. Artieda of Jorge E. Artieda Law Office P.C. in Falls Church, Virginia, represented Cerritos Rivas in his petition for review. The government was represented by Acting Assistant Attorney General Yaakov M. Roth, Assistant Director Lindsay B. Glauner, and attorney Kitty M. Lees from the Office of Immigration in the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Fourth Circuit's decision comes at a time when immigration courts are facing significant backlogs and asylum seekers from Central America continue to seek protection in the United States. The court's ruling follows established precedent that gives substantial deference to immigration judges' credibility determinations and factual findings.

Asylum law requires petitioners to demonstrate that they suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of future persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. Withholding of removal provides protection from being returned to a country where the person's life or freedom would be threatened, while Convention Against Torture protection shields individuals from being sent to countries where they would likely face torture.

The Fourth Circuit noted in its brief opinion that it found "no reversible error" in the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision, suggesting that the lower courts properly applied the law to the facts presented. However, the unpublished nature of the opinion means it cannot be cited as binding precedent in future cases within the Fourth Circuit.

This case represents one of many asylum petitions from Central American nationals who have fled violence in their home countries. El Salvador has experienced significant gang violence and political instability, leading many of its citizens to seek protection in the United States. The murder of Cerritos Rivas's father and subsequent threats against his family illustrate the types of violence that drive many asylum seekers to leave their homelands.

The denial of the petition means that Cerritos Rivas's immigration case will return to the immigration court system for further proceedings. Depending on his current immigration status, he may face removal proceedings or other immigration consequences.

The Fourth Circuit's jurisdiction covers Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia, making it a significant venue for immigration cases given the substantial immigrant populations in these states. The court regularly hears appeals from the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is the highest administrative tribunal for immigration cases in the United States.

While the specific details of why the immigration judge and Board of Immigration Appeals denied Cerritos Rivas's applications are not fully detailed in the available portions of the Fourth Circuit's opinion, the court's finding of "no reversible error" suggests that the lower tribunals properly evaluated the evidence and applied relevant legal standards.

This decision reflects the broader challenges facing asylum seekers in the current immigration system, where success rates vary significantly by judge, court location, and country of origin. The case also demonstrates the multiple levels of review available in immigration proceedings, from initial immigration court hearings through Board of Immigration Appeals review and federal court petitions for review.