United States v. Phoday Phattey, 943 F.3d 1277

Phoday Phattey entered the U.S. using a Gambian passport issued in the name Foday Fatty, then filed asylum applications under both names; fingerprints later matched both identities.
After a second asylum application (as Phoday Phattey) was granted, he became a lawful permanent resident (2004) and naturalized in 2010, signing immigration and naturalization forms that omitted and falsely denied prior names, passports, and removal proceedings.
In 2017 DHS discovered the fraud and sued to revoke Phattey’s naturalization under 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a) (denaturalization for naturalization procured by fraud or willful misrepresentation).
Phattey invoked the Fifth Amendment at trial and asserted a statute-of-limitations defense, arguing 28 U.S.C. § 2462’s five-year limit for enforcement of a “penalty” barred the revocation.
The district court granted summary judgment for the government based on fingerprint evidence and a negative inference from Phattey’s Fifth Amendment invocation, and rejected the § 2462 defense.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding denaturalization is not a “penalty” under § 2462 because it restores the status quo ante rather than punishes or primarily deters.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether revocation of naturalization under 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a) is a "penalty" for purposes of the five-year limitations period in 28 U.S.C. § 2462	Denaturalization functions as a penalty and deterrent; § 2462’s five-year limit bars the government because more than five years passed after naturalization	Denaturalization is remedial — it strips a benefit fraudulently obtained and restores the status quo; it is not punitive, so § 2462 does not apply	Revocation is not a penalty under § 2462; statute of limitations defense fails; judgment for government affirmed

Johannessen v. United States, 225 U.S. 227 (denaturalization remedies past fraud and is not punishment)
Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (denaturalization is not imposed to penalize; relates to naturalization power)
Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490 (failure to meet naturalization prerequisites renders citizenship illegally procured)
Kokesh v. SEC, 137 S. Ct. 1635 (defines “penalty” for § 2462; focuses on public wrong and punitive/ deterrent purpose)
United States v. Kairys, 782 F.2d 1374 (denaturalization proceedings are not criminal or punitive)
United States v. Koziy, 728 F.2d 1314 (denaturalization deprives a privilege never rightfully held)