Isaac v. Zarlenga et al, No. 1:2020cv01566 - Document 6 (N.D. Ohio 2020)
Court Description: Opinion and Order remanding case to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service. Judge Dan Aaron Polster on 8/18/20. (P,R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Isaac v. Zarlenga et al Doc. 6 Case: 1:20-cv-01566-DAP Doc #: 6 Filed: 08/18/20 1 of 2. PageID #: 49 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ASHRAF O. ISAAC, Plaintiff, vs. KARYN ZARLENGA, et al., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 20-CV-1566 JUDGE DAN AARON POLSTER OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff Ashraf O. Issac’s Petition for Hearing on Naturalization Application and Request for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. Doc #: 1. Plaintiff filed his naturalization application on December 15, 2017 and was interviewed on June 27, 2018. Doc #: 1 at 6. Plaintiff asks this Court to now decide his immigration petition as permitted by 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b) and grant declaratory and injunction relief for Defendants’ alleged violations of the Administrative Procedure Act. Doc #: 1 at 7-8. Four days after Plaintiff filed his Petition, this Court ordered Defendants to investigate and file a status report by August 17, 2020, which they did. Defendants’ status report reveals that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) will re-interview and re-examine Plaintiff on August 26, 2020. Doc #: 5 at 1. A naturalization applicant may request a hearing from a district court where USCIS fails to make a determination on the application within 120 days of an examination. 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b). The district court may either rule on or remand the application. Id. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 1:20-cv-01566-DAP Doc #: 6 Filed: 08/18/20 2 of 2. PageID #: 50 Courts regularly remand naturalization applications brought under § 1447(b), finding that they are ill-suited to decide such matters. See Abdelkarim v. Gonzales, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31407, at *18 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 30, 2007); Musaad v. Mueller, 627 F. Supp. 2d 804, 809 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 16, 2007). Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court has stated that “judicial deference to the Executive Branch is especially appropriate in the immigration context.” I.N.S. v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 526 U.S. 415, 425 (1999). This Court agrees, finds it is ill-suited to decide Plaintiff’s naturalization application, and defers to USCIS. Accordingly, this matter is REMADNED to USCIS. The Court acknowledges that Plaintiff’s naturalization application has been pending since late 2017 and that he already was examined on June 27, 2018. USCIS is instructed to conduct the August 26, 2020 re-interview and re-examination and swiftly determine whether to grant or deny Plaintiff’s naturalization application. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/Dan Aaron Polster August 18, 2020 DAN AARON POLSTER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2
]]>
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.
