UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUHAIL TAJ, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 22-1087 (RDM) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Suhail Taj, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, brings this action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(1), and the Mandamus Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1361, to compel Defendants—various departments and officers of the United States—to adjudicate the immigrant visa application of his wife, Afsheen Arif, who currently lives in Pakistan. Dkt. 1 (Compl.). Plaintiff argues that Defendants have unreasonably delayed adjudicating his wife’s application and have thereby violated the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 555(b), and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Defendants have moved to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim. Dkt. 7. For the reasons that follow, the Court will GRANT in part and DENY in part without prejudice Defendants’ motion. I. BACKGROUND The following factual allegations are taken from Plaintiff’s complaint, which the Court accepts as true for the purposes of Defendants’ motion to dismiss. See Harris v. D.C. Water & Sewer Auth., 791 F.3d 65, 67 (D.C. Cir. 2015). On September 21, 2018, Suhail Taj, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, submitted a Form I-130 (an Alien Relative Petition) to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“UCSIS”) on behalf of his wife, Afsheen Arif, who is a Pakistani citizen. Dkt. 1 at 3–4 (Compl. ¶¶ 12–13). USCIS approved Plaintiff’s visa petition in December 2019 and forwarded it to the National Visa Center (“NVC”), a component of the State Department, for additional processing. Id. at 4 (Compl. ¶¶ 15–16). The NVC assigned a case number to the petition, but has not, to date, called Ms. Arif to the U.S. Embassy in Islabamad for an interview. Id. (Compl. ¶¶ 16–17). In the intervening years, Plaintiff has made several inquiries with the consulate, to no avail. Id. (Compl. ¶ 18). Plaintiff commenced this action on April 19, 2022, naming the State Department, the Secretary of State, the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, and the Chargé D’Affaires of the United States at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad as Defendants. Dkt. 1 (Compl.). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ “refus[al] to adjudicate Plaintiff’s application and to issue the requested visa” violates Defendants’ “non-discretionary duty to conclude agency matters” under Section 555(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, id. at 4–5 (Compl. ¶¶ 20–22), and violates his Fifth Amendment right to “fundamental fairness in administrative adjudication,” id. at 6 (Compl. ¶ 35). Moreover, although Plaintiff does not name the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) as a Defendant in the suit, he asserts that Defendants are intentionally delaying his wife’s visa application pursuant to a DHS policy known as the “Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program” (or “CARRP”), id. at 5–6 (Compl. ¶¶ 24–29), which he contends “delays the applications of applicants” from Muslim-majority countries or regions “due to security concerns,” id. at 5 (Compl. ¶ 24). Plaintiff, accordingly, also requests that this Court “[e]nter a …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals