A FARMER who has resided on Saipan continuously for 24 years is suing U.S. Citizenship Immigration Services and the Department of Homeland Security over the rejection of his long-term legal residency application.
Jinluan Xu, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China and represented by attorney Samuel Mok, named as defendants USCIS Director Ur Mendoza Jaddou and DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
Xu is petitioning the District Court for the NMI to issue a writ of mandamus directing USCIS to accept and process his 1-955 and 1-765 applications for status pursuant to the Northern Mariana Islands Long-Term Legal Residents Relief Act.
Signed by then-President Donald Trump on June 25, 2019, the Act allows certain aliens who have resided continuously and lawfully in the CNMI since Nov. 28, 2009 to remain in the Commonwealth.
Mok said the deadline for submitting these documents was Aug. 17, 2020.
He said his client timely attempted to file his applications for status prior to the deadline.
“However, petitioner’s applications were wrongfully rejected twice with both rejections based on erroneous grounds as described in this petition,” he said.
“Petitioner’s attempts to resolve these erroneous rejections was unsuccessful with Petitioner not receiving any responses to his written requests for relief to USCIS.”
Xu is “seeking the narrow relief of an order from this court mandating that the respondents accept and process the petitioner’s applications for status that had been wrongfully rejected,” Mok said.
“Petitioner is not asking that the court decide his applications for status, “he added.
According to the lawsuit, Xu is a farmer who grows fruits and vegetables on a farm in As Lito, Saipan.
The fruits and vegetables that Xu grows on his farm are sold to consumers on Saipan including many local restaurants and private individuals.
Xu is particularly known for growing excellent watermelons and honey melons which are highly sought after within the Saipan community, the lawsuit stated.
It added that Xu is the father of a U.S. citizen son, Rui Hua Qiu, who was born on Saipan on Jan. 22, 2006.
The petitioner has resided continuously and lawfully in the CNMI from Nov. 28, 2009, through June 25, 2019 and otherwise meets the statutory criteria for being eligible for CNMI long-term resident status, the lawsuit stated.
On June 25, 2020, Mok said his client attempted to file his applications for status with USCIS.
On Aug. 7, 2020, USCIS rejected Xu’s applications for status for two stated reasons.
“First, the USCIS alleged that the filing fee the petitioner submitted with his applications for status was ‘incorrect or had not been provided.’ Second, USCIS alleged that Xu had failed to complete a box stating his ‘eligibility category’ on his 1-765 application,” Mok said.
He noted that prior to rejection, USCIS “bate-stamped” the bottom of each page contained in the petitioner’s applications for status with an electronic code consisting of a long string of numbers and letters to indicate that the document was received and submitted.
On Sept. 3, 2020, Xu attempted to re-file his applications for status along with a cover letter: 1) denying that he failed to provide the correct filing fees; and 2) denying that he failed to provide his eligibility category.
“The documents Petitioner attempted to re-file on Sept. 3, 2020, were identical to the documents he initially tried to file on June 25, 2020, with the exception of the aforementioned cover letter,” Mok said.
In support of his attempted re-filing, Xu resubmitted the original money orders he had purchased from the U.S. Postal Service on June 23, 2020, which was two days before he initially filed his applications for status in the correct amounts of $410 and $85 for payment of the 1-765 filing fee and biometrics fee respectively, Mok said.
Xu also highlighted the fact that his original 1-765 application did contain a statement of his eligibility category of “C37” on page 3, part 2, item 27, Mok added.
But according to Mok, on Sept. 18, 2020, USCIS rejected Xu’s applications again.
“This time, USCIS stated a basis for rejection that was different than the reasons given in the initial rejection notice,” Mok said.
Specifically, he added, USCIS now alleged that the petitioner’s applications for status had not been “fully completed” because he purportedly failed to complete certain boxes related to the following information: 28. a) Reason for applying b) Last name c) Mailing address d) Date of birth.
Mok said, as a preliminary matter, none of the referenced alleged omissions had been referenced in the initial rejection notice issued by USCIS.
More importantly, the alleged omissions referred to in the second rejection notice were inaccurate as petitioner provided all such information in his initial attempted submission on June 25, 2020, Mok said.
“Indeed, it is unclear how such basic information as the petitioner’s last name, mailing address and date of birth would have been omitted by the petitioner and not been noted by USCIS in its initial rejection notice,” he added.
It is also unclear how USCIS could have addressed both rejection notices to the full name of the petitioner and known what address to mail both rejection notices to if such information had truly not been provided, Mok said.
On Oct. 20, 2020, the petitioner sent written correspondence to USCIS requesting that his wrongfully rejected applications for status be accepted for processing.
“To date, no response was ever received by the petitioner,” Mok said.
On April 5, 2021, the petitioner sent written correspondence to the USCIS legal counsel for the Western Law Division with jurisdiction over the CNMl.
Mok said “the aforesaid correspondence outlined the facts as expressed in this petition and requested that the petitioner’s applications for status be accepted and processed. To date, no response was ever received by the petitioner.
Mok said USCIS’s “unreasonable, arbitrary and/or erroneous rejection(s) of the petitioner’s applications for status are directly and solely attributable to USCIS and is not attributable in any way to the petitioner.”
