CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 19-00446 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 19-00446

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date11/13/2019
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Elizabeth M. Matchinski
Government Counsel: Carroll J. Connelley
Applicant's Counsel: Eric A. Eisen
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a dual citizen of the United States and Egypt, who worked for a defense contractor in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) from May 2014 to November 2016. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons citing concerns under Guideline B (foreign influence) and Guideline C (foreign preference), primarily due to the applicant's close family ties in Egypt and his previous employment with a foreign defense contractor supporting the UAE military.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to the allegations under Guideline B, acknowledging his family's dual citizenship and their residence in Egypt. He explained that his parents intended to move to the U.S. but had obligations in Egypt. The applicant denied having divided loyalty, asserting that his work in the UAE was not contrary to U.S. interests and that he had not maintained significant ties to Egypt since moving to the U.S. in 2009. He expressed a sense of belonging in the U.S. and claimed his loyalty was to his work and employer.
The administrative judge ruled to deny the applicant's security clearance, concluding that while some concerns regarding foreign preference were mitigated, the applicant's strong familial connections to Egypt and the nature of his previous employment raised persistent foreign influence security concerns. The judge determined that these factors outweighed the applicant's assertions of loyalty to the U.S. and his professional conduct.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · Against Applicant
- Guideline CForeign Preference · For Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 19-00446

deniedNov 13, 2019· Hon. Elizabeth M. Matchinski· hearing

Summary

A 33-year-old dual U.S. and Egyptian citizen was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The primary disqualifying conditions were the applicant's close family ties in Egypt, specifically his parents and siblings, which raised a risk of foreign influence.

While the applicant successfully mitigated some foreign preference issues, the judge determined that the strong familial connections to Egypt remained a significant security risk. These ties were deemed substantial enough to create a potential for undue foreign influence, leading to the denial.

The decision highlighted that despite efforts to address certain foreign preference concerns, the inherent risk posed by the applicant's close family in Egypt could not be sufficiently mitigated. Consequently, the security clearance was denied.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has close family ties to Egypt, including parents and siblings, which create a risk of foreign influence.
Despite mitigating some foreign preference concerns, the applicant's connections to Egypt were deemed significant enough to pose a security risk.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)appliedContact with Foreign Family MembersThe applicant's close family ties to Egypt create a heightened risk of foreign exploitation.
AG ¶ 7(b)appliedPotential Conflict of InterestThe applicant's obligations to protect classified information may conflict with his desire to assist family in Egypt.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(c)appliedCasual and Infrequent ContactThe applicant's limited contact with a friend in the UAE was deemed insufficient to create a risk of foreign influence.
AG ¶ 11(f)appliedLow National Security RiskThe applicant's employment in the UAE was not found to be in conflict with U.S. interests.

Key Rule Quoted

“A person who seeks access to classified information enters into a fiduciary relationship with the Government predicated upon trust and confidence.”
— Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 6, 2019
Answer filedMay 30, 2019
Hearing heldSep 25, 2019
Decision dateNov 13, 2019

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties Under Guideline B
Mitigation of Foreign Preference Issues Under Guideline C
The Significance of Familial Obligations in Security Clearance Determinations.

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.