Singh v. United States

Ranjit Singh, et al., Plaintiffs, v. United States of America, et al., Defendants

No. 1:20cv799

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio

September 2, 2021

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

PAMELA A. BARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

This matter concerns the denial of a Form I-130 Petition for Alien Relative (“Form I-130 Petition”) filed by Plaintiff Kristine Singh (hereinafter “Ms Singh”) on behalf of her husband Plaintiff Ranjit Singh (hereinafter “Mr. Singh”). Ms. Singh's Form I-130 Petition was denied by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and the denial was affirmed by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). Plaintiffs seek review under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C § 701 et seq.

Currently pending is Plaintiffs' “Objection to Defendants' Certified Administrative Record.” (Doc No. 15.) Defendants United States of America; Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States; Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”); Kenneth Cuccinelli, Senior Official Performing Duties of the Director of USCIS; Anna Chau District Director of USCIS District N12; and Karyn Zarlenga, Cleveland Field Office Director of USCIS^[1]filed a Brief in Opposition on May 14, 2021. (Doc. No. 17.) Plaintiffs did not file a Reply.

For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' Objection is overruled.

I. Background

A. Factual Background and Administrative Proceedings

In September 1990, Mr. Singh entered the United States without inspection at or near Brownsville, Texas. (Doc. No. 14-2 at PageID# 183.) Eleven years later, in 2001, Mr. Singh married Heidi Newrones (hereinafter “Ms. Newrones”), a United States citizen. (Id.) Ms. Newrones subsequently filed a Form I-130 Petition on Mr. Singh's behalf, and Mr. Singh concurrently filed a Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status.^[2] (Id.)

Mr. Singh's and Ms. Newrones's marriage came to an end in 2003. Specifically, a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage was filed on June 11, 2003 and an Entry and Decree of Dissolution of Marriage was thereafter issued on August 28, 2003. (Id.) Two years later, in August 2005, Ms. Newrones's Form I-130 Petition was denied “as the marriage between Mr. Singh and Ms. Newrones was terminated.” (Id.) In addition, Mr. Singh's Form I-485 Petition was administratively closed “as USCIS did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the application, as Mr. Singh was still under the jurisdiction of the Immigration Judge.” (Id.)

Several years later, on May 6, 2013, Mr. Singh married Plaintiff Kristine Singh (then-known as Kristine Vincent) in Cleveland, Ohio. (Id.) Ms. Singh subsequently filed the instant Form I-130 Petition on Mr. Singh's behalf. (Id.) Ms. Singh submitted various evidence in support of the Petition, including (1) joint checking account statements; (2) bank cards; (3) a copy of a lease agreement for Plaintiffs' purported marital residence; (4) various bills in Mr. Singh's name; (5) a Verizon wireless call log; (6) copies of Plaintiffs' marriage license and marriage record; (7) a copy of the Separation Agreement and Entry and Decree of Dissolution of Marriage between Mr. Singh and Ms. Newrones; (8) six notarized statements attesting to the validity of Plaintiffs' marriage; and (9) copies of various photographs. (Id.).

In March 2016, Mr. and Ms. Singh appeared for an interview with an Immigration Services officer in connection with the Form I-130 Petition. (Id. at PageID# 184.) Based on statements made by Plaintiffs during the interview, and USCIS's review of the evidence submitted, USCIS determined that “the testimony and documentary evidence in the record did not establish the claimed relationship” between Mr. and Ms. Singh. (Id.) USCIS therefore referred Ms. Singh's Form I-130 Petition for “further investigation regarding the bona fides of [Plaintiffs'] current marriage and [Mr. Singh's] prior marriage to Heidi Newrones.” (Id.)

Immigration officials subsequently contacted Ms. Newrones by telephone in August 2016 regarding her previous marriage to Mr. Singh. (Doc. No. 14-6 at PageID# 570.) USCIS summarized its telephone conversation with Ms. Newrones as follows:

IO Zinnerman spoke with Heidi FREDRICKSON (aka: NEWRONES). [Newrones] stated in the telephonic interview she met the beneficiary through a friend who worked with the beneficiary's cousin and had known him for 7 years prior to marriage. [Newrones] admitted the beneficiary asked her several times to marry him as a favor before she complied. [Newrones] stated she was nervous and was never comfortable with the issue, however complied with his request to marry him as a favor because she felt bad and was concerned for his safety if he returned to India. [Newrones] stated they signed a lease together at 147 Deerfield Lane, Aurora, OH; however the beneficiary never moved in with her. [Newrones] stated the beneficiary was supposed to move in with her at the Deerfield location but he never moved in. [Newrones] stated she recalls the beneficiary living in Maple Heights at the time she lived on Deerfield Lane. [Newrones] stated the beneficiary paid half of the rent because he was scheduled to move in but when he did not move in, she stopped taking half of the rent money and her sister later moved in with her at the Deerfield location. [Newrones] stated she never consummated the marriage with the beneficiary, and never had a bona fide boyfriend/girlfriend relationship with the beneficiary. [Newrones] stated very few people knew about the marriage with the beneficiary, with her children and father finding out on 8/10/2016. [Newrones] stated she was in a relationship with David FREDRICKSON since the end of 2000 and was dating DAVID the entire time of the marriage with the beneficiary. [Newrones] stated the beneficiary did not promise her anything and she did not receive any money from him for agreeing to the fraudulent marriage. [Newrones] stated when she filed for divorce so that she could freely marry DAVID, in which the beneficiary got upset and wanted her to stay married in order to continue with the immigration process. [Newrones] admitted it was not a real marriage.

(Id.) Plaintiffs allege that Ms. Newrones was coerced into making the above statements, alleging that “immigration officials confronted Ms. Newrones, accused her of fraud, and threatened her with fines and jail time if she did not admit her marriage to Mr. Singh was a sham.” (Doc. No. 1 at ¶ 21.) In addition, Plaintiffs allege that, at the time of her interview with USCIS, Ms. Newrones was in severe pain and awaiting back surgery. (Id.)

The USCIS also conducted an unannounced visit to Plaintiffs' marital residence as part of its further investigation regarding Ms. Singh's Form I-130 Petition. (Doc. No. 14-6 at PageID# 571.) The Immigration officers noted that Mr. Singh was not at the residence at the time of the visit and, further, that a visual inspection of the residence revealed “minimum [sic] personal belongings” of Mr. Singh.^[3] (Id. at PageID# 571-572.) The officers noted that there were no daily transactions or withdrawals in the Plaintiffs' joint checking account and that Ms. Singh admitted she had a personal account at a different bank which she used on a daily basis. (Id.) The USCIS officers then visited the home of Ms. Singh's mother, Linda Abood. (Id. at PageID# 572.) According to the officers, Ms. Abood made several statements that contradicted statements made by Ms. Singh. (Id.) Lastly, the USCIS officers visited one of Plaintiffs' neighbors. (Id. at PageID# 573.) This neighbor was able to identify Ms. Singh and her two children but did not recognize a photo of Mr. Singh. (Id.)

On August 10, 2017, USCIS issued a Notice of Intent to Deny (“NOID”) Ms. Singh's Form I-130 Petition. (Doc. No. 14-2 at PageID#s 194-203.) Therein, the USCIS advised Ms. Singh that the evidence supporting the Form I-130 Petition was insufficient to establish eligibility for the benefit sought. (Id.) The NOID specifically cited the discrepancies discussed above and provided Plaintiffs the opportunity to respond. (Id. at PageID# 197- 200)

On September 18, 2017, Plaintiffs responded to the NOID and submitted additional pieces of evidence in support of the Petition, including (1) a brief from Plaintiffs' attorney; (2) copies of joint bank statements and personal money orders; (3) utility bills; and (4) affidavits from Ms. Singh, Mr. Singh, and Ms. Singh's son M. R. (Doc. No. 14-2 at PageID# 187.) In addition, on May 2, 2018, Plaintiffs submitted additional evidence in support of the Petition, after requesting and receiving information in response to a Freedom of Information Privacy Act (“FOIA”) request. (Id.) The additional evidence submitted in support of the Petition included the following: (1) a brief from Plaintiffs' attorney; (2) copies of letters from USCIS's FOIA Operations division; (3) copies of six redacted affidavits obtained via Plaintiffs' FOIA request; and (4) copies of an Immigration Officer's notes, also obtained via the FOIA request. (Id.)

According to USCIS's summary, in his affidavit, Mr. Singh averred that he did not marry either Ms. Newrones or Ms. Singh for immigration purposes. (Id. at PageID# 188.) He explained that he did not have substantial personal items at his marital residence with Ms. Singh “as he sometimes remains in Akron because of work.” (Id.) He further stated that there were, in fact, other personal items of his in the marital residence that USCIS did not see during the unannounced visit. (Id.) Likewise, in her affidavit, Ms. Singh insisted that she and Mr. Singh are in a bona fide relationship. (Id. at PageID# 187.) She explained that, due to several health issues, she is unable to drive Mr. Singh back and forth from his job in Akron...