Sukhwinder Singh Kaila v. Attorney General United States of America

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 22-1553 SUKHWINDER SINGH KAILA, Appellant v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; ACTING DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CIS; ACTING DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR NEW JERSEY UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 1-20-cv-03145) District Judge: Honorable Renee M. Bumb Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on January 17, 2023 Before: AMBRO, PORTER, and FREEMAN, Circuit Judges (Opinion Filed: February 7, 2023) OPINION* AMBRO, Circuit Judge. Sukhwinder Singh Kaila appeals from the District Court’s summary judgment against him in this naturalization proceeding under 8 U.S.C.§ 1421(c). We affirm. I Kaila is an Indian national who entered the United States without documentation in 1993. A358–59. After being apprehended by Border Patrol agents and being provided a translator, Kaila identified himself as “Sukwinder Singh” and signed his name as such four times. A349, 354, 356, 360. He was then given an A-number, an Order to Show Cause, and was notified of his removal hearing before being released. A358–60. But Kaila never appeared at the 1994 hearing. Due to his failure to appear, the immigration judge administratively closed his removal proceedings. A363. Kaila remained subject to deportation, but the administrative closure meant his case was removed from the calendar until either party filed a re-calendar request. Kaila filed for asylum in September 1995. A379–93. His application, which was filed using his proper last name, Kaila, omitted mention of his previous A-number and denied ever being arrested, in removal proceedings, or previously using aliases. Kaila’s * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 application also claimed he first entered the United States in 1995. Id. USCIS assigned Kaila a new A-number and later granted him asylum. A394–96. In 1996, Kaila submitted an I-485 Application to adjust his status from asylee to a permanent resident. A398–404. In his application, he again did not disclose his previous arrest, removal proceeding, prior A-number, or use of an alias. Id. USCIS denied his application because he was living in Canada as a lawful immigrant. A406–07. In 2007, Kaila again sought to adjust his status to a permanent resident, this time submitting an I-485 Application to adjust his status based on a previously approved employment-based immigration petition. A409–14. He again failed to mention his previous A-number, arrest, removal proceedings, or previous use of aliases. Id. In reviewing his application, USCIS found Kaila’s first A-number and arrest and consolidated all his previous A-numbers into one file. A185 ¶ 13. Somehow, due to what the Government calls an “administrative oversight,” USCIS approved his application in 2011, making him a permanent resident. Ans. Br. at 23. A409. In 2016, Kaila applied for naturalization but was denied by USCIS. …

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