MIRIYEVA UPDATES

The case of Miriyeva, et al. v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, et al., No. 1:19-cv-03351 is not a class action and is not seeking to become one.  Therefore, MAVNIs, other than those listed in the complaint, are not represented by Morgan Lewis in Miriyeva with respect to the naturalization issues raised in that case.

However, there may be information from the Miriyeva case that MAVNIs may find useful.

On December 21, 2019, the district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss the Miriyeva complaint without prejudice.  The court explained that, in its view, these types of legal challenges must be brought under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c) in the federal district court that has jurisdiction over the individual soldier’s naturalization application (and after USCIS makes a final denial decision on that application, including any N-336 decision). 

The court did not address the parties’ motions for summary judgment and did not reach the merits of the case, including the question of whether USCIS’s policy of treating “uncharacterized” military discharges as disqualifying for naturalization purposes is unlawful.  Because the court did not reach this question, individual MAVNI soldiers and their counsel who wish to file a § 1421(c) lawsuit may make, in addition to any other arguments establishing the soldier’s eligibility for naturalization, the same arguments questioning the lawfulness of USCIS’s “uncharacterized” discharge policy.  These arguments and legal claims are set forth in the Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Dockets 1 and 2) posted below.

An appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was filed on February 18, 2020. The appeal remains pending. 

Key documents from the Miriyeva action can be found through these links.

• Miriyeva Docket 1 – November 6, 2019 Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief
• Miriyeva Docket 2 – November 6, 2019 Plaintiffs’ Motion For a Preliminary Injunction
• Miriyeva Docket 13 – November 13, 2019 Court Order
• Miriyeva Docket 14– November 18, 2019 Plaintiffs’ Statement of Material Facts in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion For Partial Summary Judgement
• Miriyeva Docket 15 – November 22, 2019 Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
• Miriyeva Docket 16 – December 4, 2019 Plaintiffs’ Opposition To Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss
• Miriyeva Docket 17 – December 11, 2019 Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss
• Miriyeva Docket 19-1 – December 13, 2019 Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
• Miriyeva Docket 19-2 – December 13, 2019 Defendants’ Statement of Material Facts About Which There Is No Genuine Dispute and Response to Plaintiffs’ Statement of Material Facts
• Miriyeva Docket 20 – December 21, 2019 Court Order
• Miriyeva Docket 21 – December 21, 2019 Memorandum Opinion
• Miriyeva Docket 22 – February 18, 2020 Notice of Appeal
• Miriyeva Appellate Document Number 1838137 – April 14, 2020 Court Order

Disclaimer

This website and the materials provided herein are made available by class counsel to provide publicly available information regarding the Kirwa and Nio class actions.  Nothing on this website creates or establishes any attorney client relationships between class counsel and any persons or entities.   Your use of the Site is conditioned on your understanding and acknowledgement that (1) the material and information on the Site is not offered as and does not provide legal advice on any matter and should not be used as a substitute for seeking legal advice, and (2) class counsel and site administrators are not and will not be responsible for any errors or omissions on this website or any action or failure to act in reliance upon information on the Site.