```

[House Report 106-893]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-893

======================================================================

 
              FOR THE RELIEF OF ZOHREH FARHANG GHAHFAROKHI

                                _______
                                

  September 26, 2000.--Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to 
                               be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Hyde, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3184]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 3184) for the relief of Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi, 
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                  

                                                                 Page
Purpose and Summary........................................           1
Background and Need for the Legislation....................           1
Committee Consideration....................................           2
Committee Oversight Findings...............................           2
Committee on Government Reform Findings....................           3
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures..................           3
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate..................           3
Constitutional Authority Statement.........................           3
Agency Views...............................................           4

                          Purpose and Summary

    This bill would make the claimant eligible for adjustment 
of her status to that of a permanent resident.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

    Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi and her husband were married in 
1977. In 1984, Zohreh Ghahfarokhi and her oldest daughter came 
to the U.S. with Zohreh's husband on a business visa. While in 
the U.S., another daughter was born. In 1994, the husband filed 
to adjust status for himself, Zohreh and the Iranian daughter 
to permanent residents as employment-based immigrants.
    Zohreh and her husband were starting to have marital 
problems. In 1996, Zohreh and foreign-born daughter received 
advance parole to go to Iran with the husband and U.S.-born 
child to visit family. During the trip Zohreh gave her husband 
her passport and the advance parole documents for safe keeping. 
The husband contacted Zohreh a few days later and informed her 
that he would not allow her or their two daughters to return to 
the U.S. so she could not divorce him and take half of their 
assets (they resided in California). The husband returned to 
the U.S. Zohreh requested a replacement passport in Iran. 
Zohreh's file at the passport office included a revocation of 
permission to leave Iran submitted by the husband (in Iran a 
woman needs her husband's permission to travel). Further, the 
husband threatened that Zohreh would be killed if she returned 
to Los Angeles. When the eldest daughter reached 18 and was no 
longer controlled by the husband's revocation, the daughter 
applied for a passport. While waiting for issuance of the 
daughter's passport, they were made aware of a clause in 
Iranian law that said if a woman's husband did not reside in 
Iran, the woman could petition for a review of the situation 
and possible be granted permission to leave (despite the 
husband's wishes). Zohreh immediately filed such a request. 
After a month, the request was granted.
    In December 1996, Zohreh and her youngest daughter were 
paroled back into the U.S. and joined the eldest daughter. She 
filed for divorce from her husband. The husband informed her 
that if the divorce became finalized he would withdraw her and 
the daughter's permanent residency applications. They 
reconciled for a year before Zohreh realized that the husband 
had already revoked the applications and they separated again. 
The husband added the daughter back to his application and she 
was granted permanent residency on September 21, 1999.
    While Zohreh has been in the U.S. with her family for the 
majority of the last 15 years, due to the husband's withdrawal 
of her name from the permanent residence application, she has 
no way to legally stay in this country. Her U.S. citizen child 
is 11 and cannot petition for her until age 18. Her eldest 
daughter must be a U.S. citizen to petition for her mother 
(five years).

                        Committee Consideration

    On July 27, 2000, the Subcommittee on Immigration and 
Claims met in open session and ordered favorably reported the 
bill H.R. 3184, without amendment by voice vote, a quorum being 
present.
    On September 19, 2000, the Committee on the Judiciary met 
in open session and ordered reported favorably the bill H.R. 
3184 without amendment by voice vote, a quorum being present.

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, the committee reports 
that the findings and recommendations of the committee, based 
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

                Committee on Government Reform Findings

    No findings or recommendations of the Committee on 
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in 
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House Rule XI is inapplicable because 
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or 
increased tax expenditures.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the committee believes that 
the bill would have no significant impact on the Federal 
budget. This is based on the Congressional Budget Office cost 
estimate on H.R. 3184. That Congressional Budget Office cost 
estimate follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                Washington, DC, September 22, 2000.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed three private relief bills, which were ordered 
reported by the House Committee on the Judiciary on September 
19, 2000. CBO estimates that their enactment would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. These bills could 
have a very small effect on fees collected by the Immigration 
and Naturalization Service and on benefits paid under certain 
federal entitlement programs. Because these fees and 
expenditures are classified as direct spending, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would apply. The bills reviewed are:
         LH.R. 848, a bill for the relief of Sepandan 
        Farnia and Farbod Farnia;
         LH.R. 3184, a bill for the relief of Zohreh 
        Farhang Ghahfarokhi; and
         LH.R. 3414, a bill for the relief of Luis A. 
        Leon-Molina, Ligia Padron, Juan Leon Padron, Rendy Leon 
        Padron, Manuel Leon Padron, and Luis Leon Padron.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was 
approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for 
Budget Analysis.
            Sincerely,
                                  Dan L. Crippen, Director.

cc:
        Honorable John Conyers Jr.
        Ranking Democratic Member

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to rule XI, clause 2(1)(4) of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 of the 
Constitution.

                              Agency Views

    The comments of the Immigration and Naturalization Service 
on H.R. 3184 are as follows:

                        U.S. Department of Justice,
                    Immigration and Naturalization Service,
                                     Washington, DC, July 14, 2000.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: In reference to your request for a 
report relative to H.R. 3184, for the relief of Zohreh Farhang 
Ghahfarokhi, attached in a Memorandum of Information regarding 
the beneficiary.
    The bill would grant the beneficiary permanent residence in 
the United States as of the date of its enactment, upon payment 
of the required visa fee. The bill would also direct the proper 
visa number deduction from the beneficiary's native country.
            Sincerely,
                                      FOR THE COMMISSIONER,
                            Gerri Ratliff, Acting Director,
                                   Congressional Relations.

cc:
        Department of State--Private Bill Staff
        District Director--Los Angeles, CA
        Investigations--Craig Porter

 MEMORANDUM OF INFORMATION FROM IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE 
                          FILES RE: H.R. 3184

    Information concerning this case was obtained from Zohreh 
Farhang Ghahfarokhi, the beneficiary.
    The beneficiary, Zohreh Farhang Ghahfarokhi, a native and 
citizen of Iran, was born on July 4, 1957. She is divorced and 
resides in Beverly Hills, California, with her two daughters. 
The beneficiary graduated from the University of Political and 
Social Science in Tehran, Iran in June of 1979, with a 
Bachelor's Degree in Political Science. The beneficiary has six 
brothers and sisters all who are citizens and residents of 
Iran. The beneficiary was married in 1977 to Seyed Rahim 
Shafaghiha. The beneficiary has resided in the United States 
since November of 1984. She is self-employed, and owns 
commercial and residential rental property.
    The beneficiary first entered the United States as a 
nonimmigrant visitor in November 1984. Her last entry into the 
United States was as the spouse of a nonimmigrant treaty 
investor on October 15, 1993. On March 9, 1995, her former 
husband, Seyed Rahim Shafaghiha filed an application for 
himself, the beneficiary, and their daughter, Shahrzad 
Shafaghiha, to become lawful permanent residents. In December 
1996, Mr. Shafaghiha removed the beneficiary and their 
daughter, Shahrzad, from the application. On February 12, 1999, 
the beneficiary was divorced from Mr. Shafaghiha. In September 
1999, Mr. Shafaghiha decided to add their daughter, Shahrzad, 
back on the application and she became a lawful permanent 
resident on September 21, 1999.
    The beneficiary claims assets of about $3,107,800 in real 
estate holdings and has liabilities of about $245,763 in 
mortgage loans and a personal loan. She has an annual income of 
about $80,000 to $100,000 from her commercial and residential 
rental property.
    The beneficiary said that she would like to become a lawful 
permanent resident as she has resided in the United States for 
the last 15 years. She said that there is no judicial remedy 
for her immigration predicament and that she wants to save her 
two daughters, one who is a United States citizen and the other 
a lawful permanent resident, the extreme hardship of being 
separated from their mother. She said that her daughters need 
her financial and physical support.
    A fingerprint check for the beneficiary through the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation was conducted with negative results.
    A check of indices of the National Crime Information Center 
system was made with negative results. Record checks for local 
arrests and warrants were conducted by the Emporia, Kansas 
Police Department with negative results. A personal interview 
was conducted with the beneficiaries, where under the penalty 
of perjury, they swore they had not committed any acts, which 
would be considered a crime of moral turpitude.
    Fingerprint cards were submitted to the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation and processed with negative results.

                                  

```