Kurapati, et al. v. USCIS, et al., No. 13-13554 (11th Cir. 2014)Annotate this Case
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, filed suit challenging the USCIS's revocation of I-140 visa petitions filed on the husband's behalf. On appeal, plaintiffs challenged the district court's dismissal of their complaint based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court concluded that the district court erred in dismissing plaintiffs' complaint for lack of constitutional standing where the regulatory definition of "affected party" does not preclude the beneficiary from having standing in the district court, as it relates to who has the ability to challenge the administrative denial of a petition, and under the test for constitutional standing, plaintiffs suffered an injury in fact from the revocation of the visa petitions. In regards to prudential standing, the court concluded that the husband fell within the zone of interests and may challenge the visa petition revocation. The court also concluded that the district court erred in dismissing plaintiffs' complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) because the complaint raises a question of law. Accordingly, the court vacated and remanded for further proceedings.