AK et al v. GARLAND et al
ORDER OF 8/2/22 FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE OPINION ISSUED THIS DATE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (ECF NO. 22) IS DENIED. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ECF NO. 24) IS GRANTED. JUDGMENT IS ENT ERED AGAINST DEFENDANTS AND IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFFS. THE DECISION OF UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES (USCIS) OF MAY 16, 2019, DENYING THE OPERATIVE PETITION, AND THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS OF JULY 30, 2022, AFF IRMING DENIAL OF THE PETITION, ARE VACATED. THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO USCIS FOR A NEW ADJUDICATION OF THE OPERATIVE I-130 PETITION CONSISTENT WITH THE COURT'S OPINION ISSUED THIS CASE, AND WITH THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: a. WHEN ADJUDIC ATING THE MATTER ON REMAND, USCIS SHALL NOT CONSIDER THE TESTIMONY OFFERED BY C. MICHAEL ROHRBACH, b. WHEN ADJUDICATING THE MATTER ON REMAND, USCIS SHALL NOT RELY ON ITS FACTUAL FINDING THAT PLAINTIFFS' ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE IN ENGLISH DURING T HE 2016 INTERVIEW WAS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PASSAGE OF YEARS BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND INTERVIEWS. RATHER, PER ITS MANDATE, USCIS SHALL CONSIDER ALL OTHER PROBATIVE EVIDENCE ON THE SUBJECT OF PLAINTIFFS' ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WITH ONE ANOTHER. SIGNED BY JUDGE: JOSEPH F. LEESON JR ON 8/2/22. 8/2/22 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (DT)
Case 5:21-cv-04507-JFL Document 31 Filed 08/02/22 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EDA AK, CEM SUMERER and OLANDO
MERRICK GARLAND, Attorney General, et al., :
AND NOW, this 2nd day of August, 2022, upon consideration of the Motion for
Summary Judgment filed by Defendants, ECF No. 22, Plaintiffs’ response thereto, ECF No. 25,
the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiffs, ECF No. 24, Defendants’ response
thereto, ECF No. 26, and for the reasons set forth in the Court’s Opinion issued this date, IT IS
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 22, is DENIED.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 24, is GRANTED.
Judgment is ENTERED against Defendants and in favor of Plaintiffs.
The decision of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) of
May 16, 2019, denying the operative petition, and the decision of the Board of Immigration
Appeals of July 30, 2020, affirming denial of the petition, are VACATED.
The matter is REMANDED to USCIS for a new adjudication of the operative I-
130 Petition consistent with the Court’s Opinion issued this date, and with the following special
When adjudicating the matter on remand, USCIS shall not consider the
testimony offered by C. Michael Rohrbach.
Case 5:21-cv-04507-JFL Document 31 Filed 08/02/22 Page 2 of 2
When adjudicating the matter on remand, USCIS shall not rely on its
factual finding that Plaintiffs’ ability to communicate in English during the 2016 interview was
attributable to the passage of years between the first and second interviews. Rather, per its
mandate, USCIS shall consider all other probative evidence on the subject of Plaintiffs’ ability to
communicate with one another.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Joseph F. Leeson, Jr.
JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR.
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?