News from the Courts

The U.S. District Court for Central District of California recently heard Hassan v. Chertoff, in which Plaintiff filed a complaint for declaratory judgment seeking naturalization against Defendant.  The Court denied Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and grants in part Defendants’ Motion to Remand.  

Plaintiff is a native of Iraq and a lawful permanent resident of the United States , he applied for citizenship on March 5, 2004.  USCIS requested a background investigation on March 17, 2004.  On July 20, 2004, Plaintiff was interviewed by USCIS.  As of the date of the filed complaint, Plaintiff has not received a determination as to his application.  The USCIS claims that the application remains pending due to an incomplete background investigation.  

On March 21, 2007 Defendants filed this Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  In the alternative, Defendants seek to Remand the matter to USCIS for adjudication pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).  Defendants claim that the Court does not have jurisdiction over the matter and seek dismissal pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1).  

On the topic of Jurisdiction, the Immigration and Nationality Act grants a district court jurisdiction on a naturalization application "if there is a failure to make a determination…before the end of the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted…" 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).  The parties dispute whether an examination has occurred.  This court held that an "examination" occurs on the date of an applicant’s naturalization interview.  Since USCIS did not make a determination within 120-days after Plaintiff’s July 2004 "examination," the Court finds that it has sufficient jurisdiction pursuant to § 1447(b).  

On the topic of Remand, §1447(b) states that a district court has discretion to "either determine the matter or remand the matter to USCIS, with appropriate instructions."  Due to the experience the USCIS has with naturalization, this Court agrees that it is no better equipped to conduct background investigations of naturalization applicants that the USCIS.  Thus, the Court finds that the Court has authority to place time limitations on remand if it deems such limitations as appropriate.

Print This Page

Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.