In the Matter of Umale

1 Citing case

  1. Ya Yun Wu v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs.

    Case No. 16-cv-03774-MEJ (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2017)

    First, Plaintiff argues that the doctrine of collateral estoppel bars the Government from relitigating the lawfulness of her permanent residency status since the IJ previously made a ruling on the merits in the removal proceedings. Second, Plaintiff argues that the denial was unlawful based on Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") precedent, Matter of Umale, 16 I & N Dec. 682 (BIA 1979). In response to the first argument, Defendant argues that administrative collateral estoppel does not apply against the Government in deciding naturalization petitions based on congressional intent and statutory language of the INA. Defendant asserts that Plaintiff must demonstrate the substantive lawfulness of her admission along with her status of permanent resident, specifically that she "entered" the United States "lawfully."