German Chajchic v. Attorney General United States, 697 F. App'x 121

Petitioner German Chajchic, a Guatemalan national, entered the U.S. as a refugee, became an LPR, and later joined the Ñetas gang in the U.S.; he admitted to driving in a 2001 MS-13 murder and testified for prosecutors.
In May 2013 Chajchic was convicted of conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance and placed in removal proceedings as an aggravated felon under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).
Chajchic conceded removability and applied for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), alleging MS-13 would kill him if returned to Guatemala and that Guatemalan authorities would acquiesce.
The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied CAT relief, finding MS-13 unlikely to target Chajchic for events over 15 years old and unlikely to learn of his deportation; the BIA affirmed.
The Third Circuit considered whether it had jurisdiction to review the BIA/IJ findings and whether the agency legally erred by failing to consider expert evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction to review factual findings supporting denial of CAT relief	Chajchic argued the IJ/BIA erred on facts showing MS-13 would not target him and the government would acquiesce	Government maintained that findings were factual and thus not reviewable because Chajchic is removable as an aggravated felon	Court held it lacked jurisdiction to review agency factual findings and therefore could not disturb the IJ/BIA credibility/factual conclusions
Alleged failure to consider expert evidence (Dr. Kirkland)	Chajchic argued the IJ/BIA omitted or failed to credit significant unrefuted expert testimony supporting likelihood of torture	Agency argued it summarized and considered Dr. Kirkland’s testimony in its decision	Court held no legal error: IJ summarized and relied on Dr. Kirkland’s testimony adequately, so consideration requirement was satisfied
Burden to aggregate probabilities of independent events	Chajchic argued agency failed to aggregate probabilities that MS-13 would both know of and pursue him	Agency asserted its conclusions were reasonable and supported by the record	Court found no evidence agency failed to aggregate and rejected the claim; denied relief

Pieschacon-Villegas v. Att’y Gen., 671 F.3d 303 (3d Cir.) (explains CAT requirement of likelihood of intentional severe pain or suffering)
Huang v. Att’y Gen., 620 F.3d 372 (3d Cir.) (agency factual findings are not reviewable)
Green v. Att’y Gen., 694 F.3d 503 (3d Cir.) (agency must consider all evidence of record; need not discuss every item)
Tarrawally v. Ashcroft, 338 F.3d 180 (3d Cir.) (court need not reach additional arguments once dispositive grounds resolved)
Hanif v. Att’y Gen., 694 F.3d 479 (3d Cir.) (court may review both IJ and BIA where BIA adopts IJ decision)
Kamara v. Att’y Gen., 420 F.3d 202 (3d Cir.) (presumption of regularity for agency action; petitioner bears burden to show error)