Cyprian Mayemba v. Eric Holder, Jr.
776 F.3d 542
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Mayemba, a Tanzania native, entered the U.S. in 2001 on an F-1 visa to study at Wichita State University.
- He married NaCeea Johnson in 2004 and had a child; his I-130 petition was approved but his I-485 adjustment was denied due to a prior false citizenship claim.
- DHS issued a Notice to Appear in 2009 charging removability and alleging multiple facts including working without authorization and falsely claiming U.S. citizenship on a Form I-9.
- Mayemba admitted removability for working without authorization but denied the false-claim charge; he intended to seek adjustment based on the approved I-130.
- An IJ found Mayemba removable and denied adjustment in 2011; he challenged (1) Form I-9 admissibility and (2) false-claim grounds, and sought reconsideration from the BIA.
- The BIA denied reconsideration in 2013; the petitions for review were consolidated and are before the Eighth Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can a Form I-9 representation support a false-claim charge? | Mayemba argues I-9 cannot ground false citizenship claim. | Government argues I-9 evidence is admissible and may support false-claim finding. | I-9 alone is not conclusive; however, other evidence may prove intent to claim citizenship. |
| Does checking the 'citizen or national' box prove a false citizenship claim? | Mayemba says the box is ambiguous and cannot prove citizenship. | Government contends box, with surrounding evidence, can establish a false claim. | Box alone is not dispositive; substantiating evidence can establish a false claim of citizenship. |
| Was there substantial evidence supporting inadmissibility based on a false citizenship claim? | Mayemba argues the evidence does not prove a false citizenship claim beyond a reasonable doubt. | BIA properly weighed evidence showing intent to represent citizenship. | There is substantial evidence supporting the BIA's finding of a false citizenship claim. |
| Did the BIA abuse its discretion in denying Mayemba's motion for reconsideration? | Presumably argued for a different result or explanation. | The BIA decision was reasonable and supported by the record. | No abuse of discretion; reconsideration denial affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Downs v. Holder, 758 F.3d 994 (8th Cir. 2014) (INA § 274A(b)(5) governs admission of I-9 evidence; plain meaning of 'this Act')
- Rodriguez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 773 (8th Cir. 2008) (box ambiguity; checking 'citizen or national' may not denote citizen)
- Hashmi v. Mukasey, 533 F.3d 700 (8th Cir. 2008) (identity of citizenship vs. national; evidence may show intent)
- Kirong v. Mukasey, 529 F.3d 800 (8th Cir. 2008) (substantial evidence standard in inadmissibility determinations)
- Ismail v. Ashcroft, 396 F.3d 970 (8th Cir. 2005) (credibility findings favor the immigration judge)
- Davila-Mejia v. Mukasey, 531 F.3d 624 (8th Cir. 2008) (BIA and IJ findings reviewed; deference to BIA determinations)
- Spacek v. Holder, 688 F.3d 536 (8th Cir. 2012) (deference to BIA interpretations of statutes and regulations)
- Mshihiri v. Holder, 753 F.3d 785 (8th Cir. 2014) (abuse-of-discretion standard for BIA reconsideration rulings)