Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-03925/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-03925-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 465
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 08:1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TATYANA EVGENIEVNA 

DREVALEVA

Plaintiff, No. C 09-3925 PJH

v. ORDER GRANTING MOTION

TO DISMISS

U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION 

SERVICES,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

Before the court is the motion of defendant U.S. Citizenship and Immigration

Services (“USCIS”) for an order dismissing the above-entitled action filed by plaintiff

Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva, a citizen of the Russian Federation. Having read the

parties’ papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority,

and good cause appearing, the court hereby GRANTS the motion.

On July 7, 2005, plaintiff filed a Form I-360 visa petition with the USCIS, seeking

immigrant classification under 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii), as an alien battered or

subjected to extreme cruelty by a United States citizen. On June 22, 2006, the Vermont

Service Center of the USCIS issued a notice of intent to deny the I-360 petition. In

response to the notice of intent to deny, plaintiff submitted additional evidence to support

her claim of extreme cruelty.

In February 2007, plaintiff filed a second I-360 petition with the USCIS, submitting

additional evidence she discovered on the Internet. On March 9, 2007, the Vermont

Case 4:09-cv-03925-PJH Document 22 Filed 05/26/10 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Service Center of the USCIS denied plaintiff’s original I-360 petition. 

Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with USCIS’ Office of Administrative Appeals

(“OAA”). On April 3, 2009, the OAA affirmed the USCIS’ decision to deny the original I-360

petition, concluding that plaintiff had not established battery or extreme cruelty as required

under 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a)(1)(A)(iii).

On August 25, 2009, plaintiff filed the present action seeking review of the USCIS’s

decision to deny her I-360 petition. On December 23, 2009, this court dismissed the

complaint, with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint on January 14,

2010.

On February 22, 2010, while this action was pending, the USCIS granted plaintiff’s

second I-360 petition. The USCIS now seeks dismissal of this action, arguing that the

action is now moot because plaintiff’s I-360 petition has been approved. 

Article III of the United States Constitution requires the existence of a live case or

controversy throughout all stages of federal judicial proceedings. LGS Architects, Inc v.

Concordia Homes of Nevada, 434 F.3d 1150, 1153 (9th Cir. 2006). If there is no longer a

possibility that a party can obtain the relief sought in the complaint, a claim is moot and

must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Allard v. DeLorean, 884 F.2d 464, 466 (9th

Cir.1989). In general, a case becomes moot when the issues presented are no longer

“live” or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome. Murphy v. Hunt, 455

U.S. 478, 481 (1982).

To satisfy the Article III case or controversy requirement, a litigant must have

suffered some actual injury that can be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. Iron

Arrow Honor Soc'y v. Heckler, 464 U.S. 67, 70 (1983). “A case becomes moot when

interim relief or events have deprived the court of the ability to redress the party’s injuries.”

American Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa. v. Baker, 22 F.3d 880, 896 (9th Cir. 1994).

In the first amended complaint, plaintiff alleges federal jurisdiction under the

Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702, seeking “relief from the actions of the

Department of Homeland Security and the United States Citizenship and Immigration

Case 4:09-cv-03925-PJH Document 22 Filed 05/26/10 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

Services.” FAC at 1. Specifically, plaintiff sought an order “overturn[ing] the decision of the

Vermont Service Center and the Administrative Appeals Office under the Administrative

Procedure[s] Act.” FAC at 33. 

In this case, the only decision taken by the Vermont Service Center and the OAA as

of the date the complaint was filed was the denial of plaintiff’s original I-360 petition. 

However, plaintiff’s second I-360 petition has now been granted, and plaintiff has obtained

the relief she sought in this case. Thus, the case is moot, and must be dismissed for lack

of subject matter jurisdiction.

The date for the hearing on the motion, previously set for June 2, 2010, is

VACATED.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 26, 2010 ______________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

Case 4:09-cv-03925-PJH Document 22 Filed 05/26/10 Page 3 of 3