United States District Court, D. Nevada
Plaintiff: CHARLES W. BENNION Ellsworth and Bennion.
Defendants: CHAD A. READLER Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney
General WILLIAM C. PEACHEY Director, District Court Section
Office of Immigration Litigation KATHERINE E.M. GOETTEL
Senior Litigation Counsel.
M. MERCADO-SANTANA Trial Attorney Office of Immigration
Litigation United States Department of Justice.
ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS AND REMAND ECF
JENNIFER DORSEY, U.S DISTRICT JUDGE.
parties, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby move to
dismiss the complaint and remand the case to United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”)
for adjudication of Plaintiff Adnan Mehmood's
(“Mehmood”) application for naturalization. In
support of this motion, the parties state as follows:
is a petition for de novo review of Mehmood's
application for naturalization as a United States Citizen
under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c). In his petition, Mehmood
contends that he meets all the requirements for
naturalization as a United States citizen. See
generally ECF No. 1. On September 23, 2016, Defendants
filed their answer. ECF No. 8.
November 8, 2016, the Court entered the Discovery Plan. In
it, the Court ordered that discovery be completed by March
22, 2017. ECF No. 13. During the discovery period, the
parties conducted discovery into issues related to
Mehmood's eligibility for naturalization.
parties, after reviewing the evidence uncovered during
discovery, believe that there are currently no known
impediments to Mehmood's naturalization as a United
States citizen. Therefore, the parties believe that the case
should be remanded to USCIS for adjudication of Mehmood's
application for naturalization.
parties believe that a remand would facilitate a prompt,
efficient, and economic resolution of this matter without the
need of further involvement by the Court. Under Ninth Circuit
law, this Court has exclusive jurisdiction over an
application for naturalization after a complaint seeking
judicial review of an application for naturalization under 8
U.S.C. § 1421(c) has been filed. See United States
v. Hovsepian, 359 F.3d 1144, 1159-60 (9th Cir. 2004).
Therefore, a remand is necessary so that USCIS regains its
authority to adjudicate Mehmood's application for
Supreme Court cautioned that “[g]enerally speaking, a
court . . . should remand a case to an agency for decision of
a matter that statutes place primarily in agency
hands.” INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12, 16-17
(2002). “This principle has obvious importance in the
immigration context . . . . The agency can bring its
expertise to bear upon the matter; it can evaluate the
evidence; it can make an initial determination; and, in doing
so, it can, through informed discussion and analysis, help a
court later determine whether its decision exceeds the leeway
that the law provides.” Id.
Mehmood must establish that he meets all the requirements for
naturalization from five years prior to filing the
application for naturalization up to the moment that he takes
the naturalization oath. 8 U.S.C. § 1427(a)(1), (3); 8
C.F.R. § 316.10(a)(1). Consequently, the parties
understand that upon remand, USCIS may inquire into whether
there are any new facts that may render Mehmood ineligible
for naturalization, and USCIS may request Mehmood to appear
for a naturalization interview. USCIS may also require
Mehmood to submit new biometrics.
parties further agree that, in the event that USCIS were to
deny Mehmood's application for naturalization, Mehmood
may request this Court to reinstate his complaint.
party shall bear their own costs and fees.
foregoing reasons, the parties request that this Court
dismiss this matter and remand to USCIS for further