Miriyeva v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _________________________________________ ) GUNAY MIRIYEVA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 19-3351 (ESH) ) U. S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION ) SERVICES, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________________ ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Before the Court is yet another case involving immigrants who enlisted in the Unites States military as part of the MAVNI program.1 These plaintiffs, Gunay Miriyeva, Ann Tum, Siddhi Kulkarni, and Bipin Kadel, are seeking naturalization under 8 U.S.C. § 1440, which provides an expedited path to naturalization based on military service during certain periods of military hostilities. Their applications have been denied by United States Citizen and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) on the ground that they do not meet the statutory requirements for naturalization under 8 U.S.C. § 1440(a) because their “uncharacterized” discharges mean that 1 The MAVNI (“Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest”) program, which was authorized from 2009 through 2017, allowed non-citizens who were lawfully present in the United States but not permanent residents to enlist in the military if they possessed critical foreign language skills or specialized medical training. Three other cases relating the to the MAVNI program and MAVNI soldiers’ path to citizenship are pending before this Court. See Nio v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Security, No. 17-cv-0998; Kirwa v. U.S. Dep’t of Defense, No. 17-cv-01793; Calixto v. Dep’t of the Army, No. 18-cv-01551. A more detailed description of the MAVNI program can be found in this Court’s prior opinions. See Nio, 385 F. Supp. 3d 44, 46- 57 (D.D.C. 2019); Kirwa, 285 F. Supp. 3d 257, 263-64 (D.D.C. 2018). they were not “separated under honorable conditions.” Plaintiffs claim that the USCIS “policy” that led to the denial of their applications violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 551, et seq., and the United States Constitution. Defendants, USCIS and its Director, Kenneth Cuccinelli, have moved to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Because the Court agrees with defendants that 8 U.S.C. § 1421 precludes the current action, their motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction will be granted. BACKGROUND STATUTORY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK A. Eligibility for Naturalization Based on Military Service (8 U.S.C. § 1440) Section 329 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1440, provides an expedited path to citizenship based on service in the United States Armed Forces during certain periods of military hostilities. In relevant part, it provides: (a) Requirements Any person who, while an alien or a noncitizen national of the United States, has served honorably as a member of the Selected Reserve of the Ready Reserve or in an active-duty status in the military, air, or naval forces of the United States during [certain specific periods of military hostilities], and who, if separated from such service, was separated under honorable conditions, may be naturalized as provided in this section . . . . The executive department under which such person served shall determine whether persons ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals