From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. HAN

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2002
No. C-01-3223 SI (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2002)

Opinion

No. C-01-3223 SI

August 8, 2002

Attorneys for Plaintiff: KEVIN V. RYAN, United States Attorney; JOCELYN BURTON, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Chief, Civil Division from San Francisco, California. Also, ROBERT D. McCALLUM, JR., Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division; THOMAS W. HUSSEY, Director; LINDA S. WENDTLAND, Assistant Director; ROBBIN K. BLAYA (MD Bar), Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division Office of Immigration Litigation from Washington, D.C.

Attorneys for Defendant: ANGELA M. BEAN, Attorney; JOREN LYONS, Attorney; with Angela M. Bean Associates from San Francisco, CA.


Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1451 (a), the United States of America ("Plaintiff") is seeking the cancellation of Robin Han's ("Defendant's") Certificate of Naturalization Number 21218059, and the revocation and setting aside of the August 15, 1996 Order of the Attorney General of the United states admitting Robin Han to United States Citizenship; Plaintiff and Defendant consider it in their best interests to resolve this matter through a settlement agreement. Therefore, Plaintiff and Defendant, by and through counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

Defendant admits all of the allegations in the Complaint and concedes that he is subject to denaturalization pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1451 (a), because he procured his naturalization illegally and through willful misrepresentation and concealment of material facts. Specifically, Defendant concedes that at the time of his naturalization on August 15, 1996, he was ineligible to naturalize because he was statutorily precluded from establishing the requisite good moral character, and had procured his naturalization by willful misrepresentation or concealment of material facts that would have shown that he was ineligible to naturalize. Defendant further concedes that he was precluded from establishing good moral character because, during the statutory period for which he was required to establish such character, Defendant had committed and been indicted of an aggravated felony crime (bank fraud), and had provided false testimony with the intent of obtaining naturalization.

Defendant consents to the entry of an Order revoking his Citizenship, and agrees to surrender his Certificate of Naturalization, Number 21218059, as well as any other indicia of Citizenship, such as a United States passport, to the Attorney General of the United States, or one of his representatives upon entry of judgment.

Defendant admits that he is subject to denaturalization pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a), because he failed to disclose the criminal indictment against him in the United States District Court action number CR-S-96-0290-WBS during the naturalization process.

Defendant represents, and the Plaintiff enters this agreement based on this representation, that Defendant has not been convicted of any criminal offense other than the bank fraud for which he pleaded guilty in the United States District Court case number CR-S-96-0190-WBS, no other charges are pending against the Defendant, and he has not violated any immigration laws except as provided by this agreement.

That Defendant is forever restrained and enjoined from claiming any rights, privileges, or advantages under any document that evidences United States citizenship obtained as a result of Defendant's August 15, 1996 naturalization.

INS will not refer Defendant's case to the United States Attorney's Office for prosecution based on his illegal naturalization.

INS agrees that Defendant's denaturalization will not affect the petition of his wife, Qi Fang Wang's (A#78050054) petition to remove the conditions from her permanent residence.

If Defendant complies with one settlement agreement as set forth above, he will he placed in removal proceedings, be ordered removed from the United States, and permanently lose his lawful permanent resident alien status. However, after his removal order becomes final, the Defendant will be granted an Administrative Stay of Removal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 241.6 (2002), be placed on an Order of Supervision pursuant to § 241(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and be granted work authorization pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 274a.12 (c) (18) (2002). The Defendant will be permitted to remain in the United States and be employed after his release from custody. However, as he will no longer be a lawful permanent resident alien, Defendant should never depart the United States because he will not be permitted to reenter once he has departed. Defendant is aware of and agrees that if he violates any other federal, state, or local law in the future, his Order of Supervision will be revoked and he will be removed to China.

Defendant enters into this Agreement freely, knowingly, voluntarily, without duress or compulsion of any kind, with full knowledge of the consequences, and with the advice of counsel. Defendant represents, and the Plaintiff enters this agreement based on the representation, that Defendant has not been convicted of any criminal offense other than the bank fraud as to when he pleaded guilty in the United States District Court case number CR-S-96-0190-WBS, no other charges are pending against the Defendant, and he has not violated any immigration laws except as provided by this agreement.

In entering this agreement, Defendant agrees that he, his heirs, and his assigns will not challenge his denaturalization by any means, including, but non limited to, any appeal (whether administrative or judicial), any collateral attack, or any application for injunctive action, equitable relief, or legislative action, whether by way of private bill or otherwise.

Plaintiff and Defendant will each bear its own attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses, if any, incurred in this matter.

This Agreement constitutes the full, complete, and entire agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant. Plaintiff and Defendant acknowledge that no party, agent, or attorney of any party has made any promise, representation, or warranty whatsoever, either express or implied, not contained herein concerning the subject matter hereof, to induce the other party to execute this Agreement, and Plaintiff and Defendant each acknowledges that it has not executed this Agreement in reliance upon any such promise, representation, or warranty not contained herein. All divisions/branches of the INS are bound by the terms of this Agreement.


Summaries of

U.S. v. HAN

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Aug 8, 2002
No. C-01-3223 SI (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2002)
Case details for

U.S. v. HAN

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBIN HAN, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Aug 8, 2002

Citations

No. C-01-3223 SI (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2002)