UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FATIMA HAIDER Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 20-3808 (CKK) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (December 1, 2021) This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ 1 (“Government”) [6] Motion to Dismiss. In this mandamus action, Plaintiff Fatima Haider (“Haider”), a lawful permanent resident of the United States, seeks an order compelling the Government to process her daughters’ visa applications expeditiously. Plaintiff also appears to allege that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program (“CARRP”) will discriminate against her and/or her family in future applications. In its Motion to Dismiss, the Government argues that: (1) her claims against DHS and affiliated entities are moot because it has granted what relief DHS can and (2) her claims against the U.S. Department of State (“State Department”) and affiliated entities are not yet ripe because she has yet to provide information required by regulation. 1 Defendants are the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Consulate, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, the Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Consul General of the United States of America at the United States Consulate, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. 1 The Court agrees, and, to the extent that Plaintiff alleges an injury arising from CARRP, that injury is too speculative to be justiciable. Accordingly, and upon consideration of the briefing, 2 the relevant legal authorities, and the record as a whole, the Court shall GRANT the Government’s [6] Motion to Dismiss and DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff’s [1] Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. I. BACKGROUND A. Statutory Background A lawful permanent resident applying for a visa for a family member must comply with a multi-step process governed by the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”). First, the applicant must submit a Form I-130 petition with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (“USCIS”), an agency within DHS. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.1(a)(1). In reviewing the I-130 petition, USCIS has applied CARRP to some, but not all, applications. See Jafarzadeh v. Duke, 270 F. Supp. 3d 296, 300 (D.D.C. 2017). CARRP is a program, allegedly ongoing, that purportedly “flags” some visa applicants for additional review based on national security concerns. See id. at 301. If DHS grants the I-130 petition it must then send the application for the National Visa Center (“NVC”) for further processing, whether it has employed CARRP or not. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.2(a)(3). The NVC is a branch of the State Department. 2 This Memorandum Opinion and Order focuses on the following documents: • Complaint in the Nature of Mandamus (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1; • Defendants’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (“Defs.’ Mot.”), ECF No. 6-1; • Declaration of Rebecca Austin (“Austin Decl.”), ECF No. 6-2; • Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals