Adegbesote v. Swanson

Background

Samuel Adelanke Adegbesote filed a petition concerning his pending application for naturalization, the process for becoming a United States citizen. He entered the United States on December 31, 2010, on a student visa, married a United States citizen on July 11, 2012, and became a permanent resident on March 22, 2013.

Adegbesote had previously asked the court to address an earlier naturalization application after USCIS did not decide it within the required period. In that earlier round of the case, the court sent the matter back to USCIS and required a decision within 30 days. USCIS later denied that earlier application.

Adegbesote filed his second naturalization application on April 23, 2020. The opinion states that USCIS had not acted on it. He filed the current petition on March 19, 2024, asking the court to exercise authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b) because more than 120 days had passed since his naturalization interview without a decision. The exact interview date is not in the record, but respondents conceded for purposes of the remand motion that the 120-day period had passed.

Motions and legal standard

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), when USCIS does not act on a naturalization application within 120 days after the applicant’s interview, the applicant may ask a federal district court for a hearing. The court may decide the application itself or send it back to USCIS for a decision.

Respondents moved to remand the matter to USCIS and represented that the agency was prepared to decide Adegbesote’s application within 21 days after remand. Adegbesote later moved for default judgment, claiming that respondents had not responded to his petition.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that courts generally hesitate to decide naturalization applications in the first instance because USCIS has relevant expertise and experience. The court also concluded that remand would promote judicial efficiency. USCIS was better positioned to use its expertise and its history with Adegbesote’s case, while deciding the application in court would require the court to begin fact discovery again.

The court noted that remand would not eliminate Adegbesote’s ability to seek judicial review. If he is dissatisfied with USCIS’s final decision, he may seek review by the court, which would then have a fully developed administrative record.

The opinion also notes a dispute about whether USCIS was properly served because Adegbesote attempted to serve the Attorney General by priority mail rather than certified mail. The court did not resolve that issue because no motion to dismiss for insufficient service was before it.

Disposition

The court granted respondents’ Motion to Remand. It denied as moot Adegbesote’s Motion for Default Judgment. It remanded Adegbesote’s request for adjudication of his naturalization application to USCIS, ordered USCIS to fully process and issue a determination within 21 days from the date of the order, and required USCIS to promptly inform the court and Adegbesote of its decision.

The respondents were ordered to show cause before the 21-day deadline if they failed to comply. The court retained jurisdiction in the interim to ensure compliance. The court did not decide whether Adegbesote qualifies for naturalization.