Marleny Casas v. USCIS District Director Miami, et al., No. 12-15165 (11th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 12-15165 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:12-cv-21083-RSR MARLENY CASAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus USCIS DISTRICT DIRECTOR MIAMI, SECRETARY, US DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, US ATTORNEY GENERAL, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (May 1, 2013) Before HULL, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 2 of 3 Marleny Casas, a native and citizen of Cuba, appeals the summary judgment in favor of the District Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General of the United States. After the entry of a final order of removal against her, Casas complained that the denial of her second application for an adjustment of status under the Cuban Adjustment Act, Pub. L. 89-732, 80 Stat. 1161 (1966), violated the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706, and she sought relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, and the Mandamus Act, id. § 1361. Casas argues that a genuine factual dispute exists about whether she presented a fraudulent passport to an immigration inspector and that dispute barred summary judgment in favor of the defendants. We affirm. The district court did not err. Casas misunderstands the standard of review of an agency action. Under the Administrative Procedures Act, the task of the reviewing court is to apply the appropriate APA standard of review . . . to the agency decision based on the record [provided by] the agency. Florida Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729, 743 44, 105 S. Ct. 1598, 1607 (1985). The administrative record establishes, as the district court concluded, that the agency based its decision to deny Casas s application for adjustment of status on substantial evidence that she submitted a fraudulent passport to immigration officials. The question before the district court was whether that decision of the 2 Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 3 of 3 agency was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. Casas cannot relitigate de novo the underlying factual dispute that the agency resolved. We AFFIRM the summary judgment in favor of the defendants. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
