The Third Circuit vacated the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) final order of removal because the BIA used the incorrect standard of review. Arreaga-Bravo applied for asylum and withholding of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The Immigration Judge (IJ) granted her petition and held that she demonstrated she would more likely than not experience torture if she returned to Guatemala and that the Guatemalan government would acquiesce in such torture. The Department of Homeland Security appealed, and the BIA reversed—instituting a removal order. In coming to its conclusion, the BIA explained that it was not “sufficiently persuaded” that Arreaga-Bravo faced a particularized risk of torture and that it was “unable to agree” with the IJ’s conclusions. Arreaga-Bravo appealed. The Third Circuit held that the BIA erred when it substituted its view of the evidence for that of the IJ rather than reviewing for clear error. Furthermore, the clear error “standard plainly does not entitle a reviewing court to reverse the finding of the trier of fact simply because it is convinced that it would have decided the case differently.”