UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEFENDER SERVICES, INC., : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 21-1314 (RC) : v. : Re Document No.: 7 : ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary, : Department of Homeland Security, et al., : : Defendants. : MEMORANDUM OPINION GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TRANSFER AND ALTERNATIVELY TO DISMISS I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Defender Services, Inc., brought this action against Defendants Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, and the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., and the Mandamus Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1361. Compl. ¶¶ 2, 5–6, ECF No. 1. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to compel Defendants to adjudicate Plaintiff’s motions to reopen and reconsider USCIS’s revocation of immigrant visa petitions filed by Plaintiff on behalf of two prospective employees. Id. ¶¶ 1, 14. Defendants have moved to transfer this action to the District of South Carolina and alternatively to dismiss this case for improper venue, to which Plaintiff has filed an opposition, and Defendants a reply thereto. For the reasons explained below, the Court will grant Defendants’ motion to transfer this case to the District of South Carolina and deny their motion to dismiss. II. BACKGROUND Plaintiff is a for-profit corporation residing in South Carolina. Compl. ¶ 4. In 2016, Plaintiff filed two Form I-140 Immigrant Petitions for Alien Worker (“Petitions”) with the USCIS on behalf of Shing Chi Chu and Man Oi Yan, two prospective employees of Plaintiff’s. Id. ¶ 6. The USCIS initially approved Plaintiff’s Petitions, but subsequently revoked its approval of the Petitions on February 22, 2019. Id. ¶¶ 6–7. Plaintiff then timely filed motions to reopen and reconsider both of the USCIS’s revocations, which were denied by the USCIS on May 30, 2019. Id. ¶¶ 8, 10. Following the USCIS’s denial of its motions to reopen and reconsider, Plaintiff filed Civil Action No. “1:20-cv-00636-RC in this Court seeking judicial review” of the USCIS’s action. Id. ¶ 11. Plaintiff later voluntarily dismissed that suit when “the USCIS sua sponte vacated its preceding decision of May 30, 2019,” following this Court’s order instructing the USCIS to respond to Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in that action. Id. ¶¶ 12–13. On May 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed this action arguing that over nine months had elapsed since the USCIS vacated its denial of Plaintiff’s motions to reopen and reconsider, which Plaintiff had filed over two years ago, and that the USCIS had failed to render a decision on Plaintiff’s motions. Id. ¶ 14. As such, Plaintiff through this action seeks “to compel a decision on [its] motions to reopen and reconsider the revocation of its immigrant visa petitions upon behalf of” its two prospective employees. Id. ¶ 1. In its complaint, Plaintiff named as Defendants Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, and the USCIS, “each an officer or agency of the United States,” and alleged that, “[i]nasmuch as both defendants reside in the District of Columbia, …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals