United States v. Mohamed Ahmed

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 18a0257n.06 Case No. 17-4046 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED May 24, 2018 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED v. ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR ) THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MOHAMED AHMED, ) OHIO ) Defendant-Appellant. ) BEFORE: CLAY, STRANCH, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. CLAY, Circuit Judge. Defendant Mohamed Ahmed (“Ahmed”) appeals from the judgment entered by the district court revoking Ahmed’s citizenship and cancelling his Certificate of Naturalization under 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a). For the reasons set forth below, we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment. BACKGROUND I. Factual History Ahmed is a native of Somalia. He is an imam employed in Columbus, Ohio who travels to different Somali communities around the world giving speeches, sermons, and lectures, and providing counseling. Case No. 17-4046, United States v. Ahmed Ahmed immigrated to the U.S. on June 21, 1997, as a lawful permanent resident. In May 2002, Ahmed sought U.S. citizenship, executing an Application for Naturalization on May 28, 2002. In order to obtain assistance in completing that application, Ahmed went to WIN Translation Services (“WIN”). A WIN employee completed Ahmed’s application. Ahmed signed and dated the application, certifying under penalty of perjury that all of the information contained within the application was “true and correct.” (R. 59, Trial Tr., PageID # 1484–85.) WIN filed the form for Ahmed. The parties dispute who filled out Ahmed’s application and what occurred during the preparation of the application. The application asked about Ahmed’s foreign travel in the five years preceding his application, from May 28, 1997 to May 28, 2002. Foreign travel is relevant to certain statutory requirements for naturalization. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1427(a)(1), an applicant must be physically present for at least 30 months of the five years (60 months) preceding the date of filing the application (the “physical presence” requirement). Under 8 U.S.C. § 1427(b), an applicant cannot have been absent for a continuous period exceeding six months during that five-year period (the “continuous residence” requirement). Ahmed’s application indicated that he had taken no trips outside of the U.S. during the relevant statutory time. This information was incorrect because Ahmed did travel abroad during those five years. In fact, he made thirteen trips outside of the U.S. as part of his work and to visit his family. Ahmed testified that those trips averaged from two to four months and one of those trips may have been over six months. The application also asked about Ahmed’s marital history and children. Ahmed’s application indicated that he had one wife and listed the children that he had with that wife. The government contended that this information was also inaccurate because Ahmed had what he referred to as a “religious” or “cultural” wife and children with her as well. -2- Case No. 17-4046, United States v. Ahmed On February 27, 2003, after submitting his naturalization application, Ahmed appeared for a naturalization interview. ...

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