Saliba v. Attorney General of the United States
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12581
| 3rd Cir. | 2016Background
- Saliba, a Syrian national, obtained Temporary Protected Status (TPS) in 1992 by submitting falsified documents claiming Lebanese citizenship.
- Syria was not eligible for TPS at that time; Saliba admits submitting a fraudulent Lebanese passport.
- In 2001 INS approved Saliba’s I-485 and adjusted him to lawful permanent resident (LPR) status despite the TPS fraud.
- USCIS denied Saliba’s naturalization applications (first in 2008, again in 2013) on the ground he was not "lawfully admitted" because he had procured TPS by fraud.
- Removal proceedings based on the fraud were later terminated under this Circuit’s Garcia decision (five-year rescission limitation), but the government did not grant any waiver of inadmissibility.
- District Court dismissed Saliba’s petition for review; the Third Circuit affirmed, holding fraud made him inadmissible and not lawfully admitted for naturalization.
Issues
| Issue | Saliba's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Saliba obtained TPS by fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact | His misrepresentation was involuntary/under duress and therefore not willful or material | He knowingly submitted falsified Lebanese documents; nationality was material because Syria was not eligible for TPS then | Held for Government: submission of false Lebanese documents was material and rendered him inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) |
| Whether an LPR granted in error is nevertheless "lawfully admitted" for naturalization | His LPR status and the passage of time (and INS error) mean he should be considered lawfully admitted | Lawful admission requires substantive compliance; obtaining LPR through fraud means never lawfully admitted | Held for Government: fraud-tainted adjustment is not "lawful admission"; therefore Saliba is ineligible for naturalization |
| Whether INS implicitly waived inadmissibility by approving adjustment without a formal waiver | The crossing-out/new A‑number and INS approval show the officer was aware and implicitly waived the bar | Waivers under §1182(i) require a formal application and fee; no evidence Saliba applied for or obtained such waiver | Held for Government: no valid waiver; implicit administrative action cannot substitute for statutory waiver procedure |
| Whether the five-year rescission statute (8 U.S.C. §1256(a)) operates as a waiver for naturalization | Expiration of rescission window and Garcia decision mean USCIS cannot rescind LPR status, so naturalization denial is barred | §1256(a) limits rescission/removal but does not affect naturalization eligibility; naturalization requires lawful admission regardless of rescission timeliness | Held for Government: §1256(a) does not convert an unlawful admission into a lawful one for naturalization purposes |
Key Cases Cited
- Gallimore v. Attorney General, 619 F.3d 216 (3d Cir. 2010) (an alien who obtained LPR status while ineligible is not "lawfully admitted" for naturalization)
- Garcia v. Attorney General, 553 F.3d 724 (3d Cir. 2009) (five-year statute of limitations bars initiation of removal/rescission proceedings based on improperly obtained LPR status)
- Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490 (1981) (strict compliance with statutory prerequisites for citizenship is required)
- Twombly v. Bell Atlantic, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading standard: claims must be plausible to survive Rule 12(b)(6))
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (courts must disregard conclusory allegations when assessing plausibility)
- Pangilinan v. INS, 486 U.S. 875 (1988) (burden on applicant to show eligibility for citizenship in every respect)