Zafarmand

Zafarmand v. Pompeo

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 9, 20203:20-cv-00803California3,381 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

BACKGROUND

14 A. Factual Background 15 Plaintiffs are three groups of individuals: (1) U.S. citizens (“Petitioner Plaintiffs”) 16 who submitted visa applications for (2) their Iranian siblings or parents (“Beneficiary 17 Plaintiffs”) and (3) other Iranian relatives (“Derivative Plaintiffs”). By the instant action, 18 plaintiffs challenge defendants’ “withholding of adjudications of case-by-case waivers of 19 Presidential Proclamation 9645, Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for 20 Detecting Attempted Entry into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety 21 Threats” (“PP 9645”). (See First Am. Compl. (“FAC”) ¶ 1.) 22 PP 9645 “prohibits the entry of all immigrants and certain categories of non- 23 immigrants for nationals of Iran” and certain other countries (see FAC ¶ 6), but provides 24 that “a consular officer, or the Commissioner, United States Customs and Border 25 Protection (CBP), or the Commissioner’s designee . . . may, in their discretion, grant 26 27 waivers on a case-by-case basis” if the “foreign national demonstrates to the consular officer’s or CBP official’s satisfaction that: (A) denying entry would cause the foreign national…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.