Bryzzhev v. United States Customs and Border Protection, 2:24-cv-01040

Oleg Bryzzhev, a Canadian citizen proceeding pro se, sued U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) after being denied membership in the NEXUS trusted traveler program.
The denial occurred after Bryzzhev presented a "World Passport" and other documents at a border crossing, which CBP found invalid.
CBP cited presenting a "fantasy document," inadmissibility to the U.S., and lack of prior border crossings as reasons for denial.
Bryzzhev sought, among other relief, recognition of the World Passport, restoration of NEXUS privileges, and a refund.
The government moved to dismiss under Rules 12(b)(1), (2), and (6) for lack of service, jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim.
Bryzzhev did not respond to the motion and failed to serve the local U.S. Attorney’s Office as required.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper Service on Defendant	Bryzzhev asserts service was sufficient.	Service was insufficient under Rule 4(i).	Service was not proper; court lacks jurisdiction.
Sovereign Immunity and Subject Jurisdiction	International agreements and constitutional provisions waive immunity.	No waiver of sovereign immunity; plaintiff cites no basis.	No waiver of immunity; court lacks subject jurisdiction.
APA/Arbitrary Agency Action	Denial of NEXUS based on invalid/fantasy document was improper.	Denial was reasoned, based on program rules.	No plausible APA claim; agency acted within discretion.
Existence of Enforceable Rights	International law & Constitution provide a right to relief.	No enforceable right; cited sources are not binding.	No enforceable rights established by plaintiff.

United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535 (1980) (United States is immune from suit unless consent is unequivocally expressed)
Irwin v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 498 U.S. 89 (1990) (waiver of sovereign immunity must be clearly expressed)
Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375 (1994) (plaintiff bears burden of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction)
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (1983) (standard for arbitrary and capricious review of agency action)
Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008) (U.N. Charter does not create binding federal law without implementing legislation)