Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

plaintiffdefendantjurisdictionhearingmotioncitizenshipnaturalizationmotion to dismissdeclaratory judgment
plaintiffdefendantjurisdictionhearingmotioncitizenshipnaturalizationmotion to dismissdeclaratory judgment

Related Cases

Licudine v. Winter
View Case »
Kalilu v. Mukasey
View Case »
Rojas v. Holder
View Case »
Hamilton v. Holder
View Case »
Beckford, Matter of
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

El Doour v. Chertoff

Facts

Plaintiff Safwat El-Daour is a Palestinian national who became a lawful permanent resident of the United States on or about May 7, 1998. On November 8, 2001, El-Daour applied for naturalization under 8 U.S.C. 1427 and 1430(a). Although El-Daour was fingerprinted, was interviewed, and was told that the examiner would recommend him for approval, El-Daour has yet to receive notice that his application has been adjudicated. Accordingly, he commenced this action seeking declaratory judgment of naturalization or, in the alternative, relief in mandamus.

Plaintiff Safwat El-Daour is a Palestinian national who became a lawful permanent resident of the United States on or about May 7, 1998. On November 8, 2001, El-Daour applied for naturalization under 8 U.S.C. 1427 and 1430(a). Although El-Daour was fingerprinted, was interviewed, and was told that the examiner would recommend him for approval, El-Daour has yet to receive notice that his application has been adjudicated. Accordingly, he commenced this action seeking declaratory judgment of naturalization or, in the alternative, relief in mandamus.

Issue

Whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction over El-Daour's complaint under 8 U.S.C. 1447(b) given that the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) had not completed its examination of his application.

Whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction over El-Daour's complaint under 8 U.S.C. 1447(b) given that the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) had not completed its examination of his application.

Rule

8 U.S.C. 1447(b) provides that if there is a failure to make a determination under section 1446 before the end of the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted, the applicant may apply to the United States district court for a hearing on the matter.

8 U.S.C. 1447(b) provides that if there is a failure to make a determination under section 1446 before the end of the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted, the applicant may apply to the United States district court for a hearing on the matter.

Analysis

The court determined that the word 'examination' as used in 8 U.S.C. 1447(b) refers to the date upon which the CIS examiner interviewed the applicant. The court found that more than 120 days had elapsed since the date of the interview without a ruling on El-Daour's application, thus establishing subject matter jurisdiction. However, the court also noted that it was not equipped to conduct a criminal background investigation, which was necessary for the adjudication of the application, and therefore remanded the case to the CIS.

The court determined that the word 'examination' as used in 8 U.S.C. 1447(b) refers to the date upon which the CIS examiner interviewed the applicant. The court found that more than 120 days had elapsed since the date of the interview without a ruling on El-Daour's application, thus establishing subject matter jurisdiction. However, the court also noted that it was not equipped to conduct a criminal background investigation, which was necessary for the adjudication of the application, and therefore remanded the case to the CIS.

Conclusion

The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction but granted the motion to remand the action to the CIS for further proceedings.

The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction but granted the motion to remand the action to the CIS for further proceedings.

Who won?

The plaintiff, Safwat El-Daour, prevailed in establishing that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over his complaint, as more than 120 days had passed since his examination without a ruling.

The plaintiff, Safwat El-Daour, prevailed in establishing that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over his complaint, as more than 120 days had passed since his examination without a ruling.

You must be