Judge Roslynn Mauskopf

Plaintiffs and their minor daughter filed an action in the nature of mandamus and for declaratory and injunctive relief to compel U.S. officials and the U.S. Embassy in Georgia to adjudicate plaintiff father’s motion to reconsider the refusal of his request for a visa, as well as for various forms of alternative relief. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding it may not review the consular official’s denial of the visa application and reconsideration request, as they were both already adjudicated. The court also found that the defendants offered a reason to believe that the plaintiff father “entered into a sham marriage” with the plaintiff mother “whom he had married for immigration purpose” and had since remarried his first wife after she obtained the ability to petition. The court noted that the plaintiffs have not disputed that the alleged misrepresentation, if true, would provide proper grounds for exclusion under the relevant statute. The court concluded that even if the finding of misrepresentation was erroneous, the proper inquiry at this state is into the facial legitimacy of the consular official’s reason, not the factual finding underlying that reason, which is whether the marriage was, in fact, a “sham.”