NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Argued December 4, 2019 Decided March 10, 2020 Before DANIEL A. MANION, Circuit Judge MICHAEL S. KANNE , Circuit Judge AMY C. BARRETT, Circuit Judge No. 19-1838 ALI ALKADY, et al., Appeal from the United States District Plaintiffs-Appellants, Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Fort Wayne Division. v. No. 1:18-CV-1-TLS CORINNA LUNA, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Theresa L. Springmann, Chief Judge. ORDER Ali Alkady filed I-130 Petitions for Alien Relatives for three of his alleged children in 2000. Nearly two decades later, having received no decisions, Alkady and the three sued for mandamus and other relief. Defendants1 moved to dismiss because the government already denied the petitions in 2003. The district court dismissed the 1Alkady named as Defendants: Corinna Luna, Los Angeles Field Office Director for USCIS; Lee Cisna, Director of USCIS; and Elaine Dukes, Acting Director of DHS. No. 19-1838 Page 2 case for mootness and the resulting lack of standing and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm. I. Via I-130, a United States citizen may petition the government to allow a family member to apply for lawful permanent resident status. The petitioner must establish his claimed relationship to the alien beneficiary. Ali Alkady is a naturalized United States citizen from Yemen. In 2000 he filed three I-130 petitions with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service—one for each of three of his alleged children: Sami, Adel, and Yasser2 Alkadi. But then he waited. For years the government’s website showed the petitions as pending and active.3 The Homeland Security Act of 2002 abolished the Immigration and Naturalization Service, effective March 1, 2003. 6 U.S.C. § 291(a). This Act also established the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which assumed responsibility for immigration adjudication. In 2013, Alkady filed another petition on behalf of Sami. This petition listed an address in New York for Alkady. This petition said the 2000 petition for Sami was withdrawn because “they decided to stay in Saudi Arabia.” In 2017, the government sent Alkady (at an address in Fort Wayne, Indiana) a Request for Evidence (RFE) regarding the 2013 petition. Alkady apparently responded from that address. USCIS allegedly directed Alkady to attend an interview on the 2013 petition, and denied that petition when he did not appear.4 II. Finally, in 2018, Alkady and his three alleged children sued. They claimed the government failed to render a full and proper adjudication of the three 2000 petitions. 2 The captions of the original and amended complaints spell this name “Yeasser.” But the bodies of these pleadings say “Yasser.” Appellants’ brief has the same discrepancy between its caption and body. The relevant I-130 and birth certificate say “Yasser.” 3 Appellees admitted in their appellate brief filed in September 2019 that the government’s website still indicated the cases remain pending. Appellees also noted the website’s entries for the three 2000 petitions showed ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals