UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ROSSVILLE CONVENIENCE & GAS, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 20-2218 (JDB) MERRICK GARLAND, Attorney General of the United States, et al. Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION In this case, plaintiffs Rossville Convenience & Gas, Inc. (“Rossville”) and Mansoor Charaniya challenge a decision by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) denying Rossville’s petition for an employment visa on behalf of Mr. Charaniya. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the Court also requested and received supplemental briefing regarding Rossville’s capacity to sue and Mr. Charaniya’s ability to proceed as the sole plaintiff. Briefing is now complete and the cross-motions—as well as the threshold questions identified by the Court—are ripe for decision. For the reasons explained below, the Court concludes that Rossville lacks capacity to sue and will accordingly drop it as a party to this action. The Court nevertheless determines that Mr. Charaniya possesses both constitutional standing and a statutory cause of action to challenge the agency’s denial of Rossville’s petition on his behalf. That challenge, however, ultimately fails: USCIS did not abuse its discretion in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 706, by denying Rossville’s petition. The Court will thus grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment and deny plaintiffs’ cross-motion. 1 Background I. Statutory Scheme The Immigration and Nationality Act, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq., provides that a certain number of “[v]isas shall be made available” to “skilled workers,” defined as “[q]ualified immigrants who are capable . . . of performing skilled labor . . . not of a temporary or seasonal nature, for which qualified workers are not available in the United States.” Id. § 1153(b)(3)(A)(i). Visas issued under this provision, known as “EB-3 visas,” are permanent work visas, and a non- citizen who receives an EB-3 visa is also eligible to become a lawful permanent resident of the United States. See id. § 1255(a); Khedkar v. USCIS, Civ. A. No. 20-1510 (RC), 2021 WL 3418818, at *1 (D.D.C. Aug. 5, 2021). To go from visa hopeful to lawful permanent resident, the non-citizen and his American employer must follow a “three-step process.” 1 E.g., Patel v. USCIS, 732 F.3d 633, 634 (6th Cir. 2013). First, the non-citizen’s employer must apply for and receive a certificate from the Department of Labor (“DOL”). See 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(3)(C) (“An immigrant visa may not be issued to an immigrant under subparagraph (A) until the consular officer is in receipt of a determination made by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to the provisions of section 1182(a)(5)(A) of this title.”); see also 20 C.F.R. §§ 656.10, 656.17 (instructions for applying for a certification). The employer’s application must, among other things, describe “the job opportunity’s requirements” and the duties to be performed. 20 C.F.R. § 656.17(h)–(i); see also Joint App’x [ECF Nos. 25-1 & 25-2] (“AR”) at 379–81 (Rossville’s application for a DOL certification in this 1 The process described here applies both to …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals