ISCR Case 15-01585.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 15-01585.h1

grantedMar 3, 2017· Hon. Arthur E. Marshall, Jr.· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old senior engineer and naturalized U.S. citizen, originally from Malaysia, was granted a security clearance despite concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The concerns stemmed from his familial ties in Malaysia and Taiwan, and his previous dual citizenship with Malaysia.

The applicant's mother and three sisters are citizens and residents of Malaysia. He sends his mother approximately $5,000 to $6,000 annually, totaling about $35,000 over the past dozen years, which he described as voluntary cultural contributions. His in-laws and brother-in-law are citizens and residents of Taiwan. His spouse is a dual U.S. and Taiwanese citizen, and their eldest child is a dual U.S. and Taiwanese citizen. However, none of these foreign relatives have connections to foreign governments or militaries, are financially dependent on foreign entities, or are aware of the applicant's work. The applicant's relationships with his sisters and brother-in-law are strained, and he has not visited Malaysia since 2008.

The applicant mitigated concerns by invalidating his Malaysian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen and is no longer considered a Malaysian citizen. He also expressed willingness to forfeit a future interest in Malaysian retirement benefits. His use of Taiwanese consular services and his wife's brief employment with a Taiwanese consular entity occurred before he became a U.S. citizen. The judge found that the applicant's strong ties to the U.S., including his family, financial holdings, and real estate, demonstrated a clear commitment to his life in the United States.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant invalidated his Malaysian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen.
He has no plans to return to Malaysia and has not visited since 2008.
The applicant's financial contributions to his mother were framed as cultural obligations, not necessities.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 10(a)raisedExercise of Any Right, Privilege or Obligation of Foreign Citizenship After Becoming a U.S. Citizen
AG ¶ 10(d)raisedAny Statement or Action That Shows Allegiance to a Country Other Than the United States

Mitigating

AG ¶ 11(b)appliedThe Individual Has Expressed a Willingness to Renounce Dual Citizenship
AG ¶ 11(c)appliedExercise of the Rights, Privileges, or Obligations of Foreign Citizenship Occurred Before the Individual Became a U.S. Citizen or When the Individual Was a Minor
AG ¶ 11(e)appliedThe Passport Has Been Destroyed, Surrendered to the Cognizant Security Authority, or Otherwise Invalidated
AG ¶ 8(a)appliedThe Nature of the Relationships with Foreign Persons Is Such That It Is Unlikely the Individual Will Be Placed in a Position of Having to Choose Between the Interests of a Foreign Individual and the Interests of the U.S.
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedThere Is No Conflict of Interest Due to the Individual's Deep and Longstanding Relationships and Loyalties in the U.S.

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 22, 2015
Answer filedOct 9, 2015Applicant admitted allegations under Guideline B and two under Guideline C.
Hearing heldSep 21, 2016Hearing convened as scheduled.
Decision dateMar 3, 2017

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Preference Concerns Through Invalidation of Foreign Passport
Cultural Obligations to Family Members Do Not Constitute Foreign Influence
Strong Ties to the U.S. Can Mitigate Foreign Influence Concerns

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

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
2.a	Applicant’s mother is a citizen and resident of Malaysia. She is 76 years old, lacks an education, is illiterate, and is retired from employment in the private sector. She has had no nexus to a foreign military and is not the recipient of state pension funds. Although she understands Applicant works as an engineer, she knows no more of his job or career. She resides in a region far from the state in which Malaysia currently experiences some friction with terrorism. (Tr. 25) They maintain contact by telephone “every few months.” (Tr. 44). She visited Applicant in the United States in 2015, after the birth of her second grandchild. It was her second visit in the past 12 years. (Tr. 45)	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Malaysia HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.b	Over the past dozen years, Applicant has sent his mother approximately $35,000 in funds, at a rate of about $5,000 to $6,000 a year. These voluntarily contributions follow “a formal Chinese tradition or culture that make (sic) children who can afford are expected to provide gift and cash for the elderly parents in a special occasions like Chinese New year or her birthday . . . out of respect.” (Tr. 26) He stresses that these payments are supplemental, not mandatory, and do not pose any conflict of interest.	For Applicant	Financial Support to Foreign Relative Immediate Family	Malaysia HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.c	Applicant also has three sisters who are citizens and residents of Malaysia. He is not close to these women and has not seen them in nearly a decade. They do not know of his work in the United States. They are all homemakers with no nexus to a foreign government. None of their spouses have connections with the Malaysian government or military. They live far from terrorist activity within their country. None of the siblings have visited Applicant and his family in the United States. They occasionally exchange texts concerning their mother or a holiday. (Tr. 45)	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Extended Family	Malaysia HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.d	Applicant’s in-laws are citizens and residents of Taiwan. Neither of these elderly retirees has a nexus with the Taiwanese government. They speak little English, do not receive retirement pensions from the Taiwanese government, and are financially independent. They do not know anything about Applicant’s work. Their occasional telephone calls to the United States are to speak with Applicant’s wife and discuss their grandchildren. (Tr. 28) Applicant’s brother-in-law is a citizen of Taiwan who resided in the United States for a period of time as part of his engineering education. (Tr. 49-50) He has no connection with the Taiwanese government or military. Applicant’s wife is not close to her brother and the two do not get along. (Tr. 29, 50) He has had no contact with Applicant or his sister in at least two years. (Tr. 50)	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Taiwan	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.e	Applicant’s spouse is a dual citizen of the United States and her native Taiwan, presently residing in the United States with their family in this country. Their eldest child, born before Applicant became a United States citizen, is a dual citizen of the United States and Taiwan through her mother’s Taiwanese citizenship. Applicant’s mother, to whom Applicant sends an annual fiscal tribute, is a citizen and resident of Malaysia, as are his sisters. Applicant’s parents-in-law and brother-in-law are citizens and residents of Taiwan. These ties potentially raise security concerns to the extent Applicant has contact with the above-referenced kin under AG ¶¶ 7 and 8.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Taiwan	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.f	Applicant provided sufficient information indicating that his relationships with his sisters and brother-in-law are strained due to distance or family friction. He does not presently maintain contact with them. His relationship with his mother is respectful, but not close; his monetary submissions to her are an expression of cultural duty, not funds needed for her upkeep. Although his relationship with his in-laws is remote, it must be assumed that his wife maintains a normal, healthy relationship with her parents. It is notable, however, that none of these individuals has a nexus with a foreign government or military, or is financially dependent on a foreign entity. None know of Applicant’s work. Those who live in Malaysia are geographically distant from terrorist activity.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	—	—	—
2.g	Moreover, Applicant’s ties to the United States are significantly stronger than they are to any foreign nation, given his passion for his work, financial holdings, real estate, home, and growing family. He has demonstrated so clear a commitment to his present life in the United States to diminish concerns regarding his sense of loyalty or obligation to foreign kin or foreign countries.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	—	Unknown	—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant’s mother is a citizen and resident of Malaysia. She is 76 years old, lacks an education, is illiterate, and is retired from employment in the private sector. She has had no nexus to a foreign military and is not the recipient of state pension funds. Although she understands Applicant works as an engineer, she knows no more of his job or career. She resides in a region far from the state in which Malaysia currently experiences some friction with terrorism. (Tr. 25) They maintain contact by telephone “every few months.” (Tr. 44). She visited Applicant in the United States in 2015, after the birth of her second grandchild. It was her second visit in the past 12 years. (Tr. 45)

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Malaysia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

2.b

Over the past dozen years, Applicant has sent his mother approximately $35,000 in funds, at a rate of about $5,000 to $6,000 a year. These voluntarily contributions follow “a formal Chinese tradition or culture that make (sic) children who can afford are expected to provide gift and cash for the elderly parents in a special occasions like Chinese New year or her birthday . . . out of respect.” (Tr. 26) He stresses that these payments are supplemental, not mandatory, and do not pose any conflict of interest.

For Applicant

Financial Support to Foreign Relative

Immediate Family

Malaysia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

2.c

Applicant also has three sisters who are citizens and residents of Malaysia. He is not close to these women and has not seen them in nearly a decade. They do not know of his work in the United States. They are all homemakers with no nexus to a foreign government. None of their spouses have connections with the Malaysian government or military. They live far from terrorist activity within their country. None of the siblings have visited Applicant and his family in the United States. They occasionally exchange texts concerning their mother or a holiday. (Tr. 45)

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Malaysia

HEIGHTENED RISK

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

2.d

Applicant’s in-laws are citizens and residents of Taiwan. Neither of these elderly retirees has a nexus with the Taiwanese government. They speak little English, do not receive retirement pensions from the Taiwanese government, and are financially independent. They do not know anything about Applicant’s work. Their occasional telephone calls to the United States are to speak with Applicant’s wife and discuss their grandchildren. (Tr. 28) Applicant’s brother-in-law is a citizen of Taiwan who resided in the United States for a period of time as part of his engineering education. (Tr. 49-50) He has no connection with the Taiwanese government or military. Applicant’s wife is not close to her brother and the two do not get along. (Tr. 29, 50) He has had no contact with Applicant or his sister in at least two years. (Tr. 50)

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Taiwan

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

2.e

Applicant’s spouse is a dual citizen of the United States and her native Taiwan, presently residing in the United States with their family in this country. Their eldest child, born before Applicant became a United States citizen, is a dual citizen of the United States and Taiwan through her mother’s Taiwanese citizenship. Applicant’s mother, to whom Applicant sends an annual fiscal tribute, is a citizen and resident of Malaysia, as are his sisters. Applicant’s parents-in-law and brother-in-law are citizens and residents of Taiwan. These ties potentially raise security concerns to the extent Applicant has contact with the above-referenced kin under AG ¶¶ 7 and 8.

For Applicant

Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen

Immediate Family

Taiwan

Denied

(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation

—

2.f

Applicant provided sufficient information indicating that his relationships with his sisters and brother-in-law are strained due to distance or family friction. He does not presently maintain contact with them. His relationship with his mother is respectful, but not close; his monetary submissions to her are an expression of cultural duty, not funds needed for her upkeep. Although his relationship with his in-laws is remote, it must be assumed that his wife maintains a normal, healthy relationship with her parents. It is notable, however, that none of these individuals has a nexus with a foreign government or military, or is financially dependent on a foreign entity. None know of Applicant’s work. Those who live in Malaysia are geographically distant from terrorist activity.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

—

2.g

Moreover, Applicant’s ties to the United States are significantly stronger than they are to any foreign nation, given his passion for his work, financial holdings, real estate, home, and growing family. He has demonstrated so clear a commitment to his present life in the United States to diminish concerns regarding his sense of loyalty or obligation to foreign kin or foreign countries.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Relationship

Other

—

Unknown

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant was a dual citizen of the United States and, through his birth in that land, Malaysia. He has a Malaysian passport, has an interest in retirement benefits acquired when he worked in Malaysia, and has utilized consular services from Taiwan. In addition, his wife worked for an entity providing consular services for Taiwan. These facts are sufficient to raise: Disqualifying Condition AG ¶ 10(a): . . . exercise of any right, privilege or obligation of foreign citizenship after becoming a U.S. citizen or through the foreign citizenship of a family member. This includes but is not limited to: (1) possession of a current foreign passport. . . (3) accepting educational, medical, retirement,.social welfare, or other such benefits from a foreign country . . . ;	For Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference (c) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce the foreign citizenship that is in conflict with U.S. national security interests (e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern	Claimed Other
1.b	Applicant had a Malaysian passport issued to him before he became a United States citizen. After becoming a United States citizen, he invalidated his Malaysian passport. Moreover, through his own voluntary actions, he is no longer considered a citizen of Malaysian. He is willing to forfeit what is presently only a future interest in a retirement benefit from Malaysia. Applicant’s nexus to Taiwan is through his wife. His use of consular services from Taiwan occurred before he was a United States citizen, as was the time of his wife’s brief employment at that entity. These facts contribute to the applicability of Mitigating Condition AG ¶11: (b) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce dual citizenship; (c) exercise of the rights, privileges, or obligations of foreign citizenship occurred before the individual became a U.S. citizen or when the individual was a minor; and (e) the passport has been destroyed, surrendered to the cognizant security authority, or otherwise invalidated.	For Applicant	Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference (c) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce the foreign citizenship that is in conflict with U.S. national security interests (e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern	Claimed Other
1.c–1.d	2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).	For Applicant			—	—	—

Allegation

Finding

Type

Response

Disqualifying (¶10)

Mitigating applied (¶11)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant was a dual citizen of the United States and, through his birth in that land, Malaysia. He has a Malaysian passport, has an interest in retirement benefits acquired when he worked in Malaysia, and has utilized consular services from Taiwan. In addition, his wife worked for an entity providing consular services for Taiwan. These facts are sufficient to raise: Disqualifying Condition AG ¶ 10(a): . . . exercise of any right, privilege or obligation of foreign citizenship after becoming a U.S. citizen or through the foreign citizenship of a family member. This includes but is not limited to: (1) possession of a current foreign passport. . . (3) accepting educational, medical, retirement,.social welfare, or other such benefits from a foreign country . . . ;

For Applicant

Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application

Admitted

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

(c) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce the foreign citizenship that is in conflict with U.S. national security interests

(e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern

Claimed

Other

1.b

Applicant had a Malaysian passport issued to him before he became a United States citizen. After becoming a United States citizen, he invalidated his Malaysian passport. Moreover, through his own voluntary actions, he is no longer considered a citizen of Malaysian. He is willing to forfeit what is presently only a future interest in a retirement benefit from Malaysia. Applicant’s nexus to Taiwan is through his wife. His use of consular services from Taiwan occurred before he was a United States citizen, as was the time of his wife’s brief employment at that entity. These facts contribute to the applicability of Mitigating Condition AG ¶11: (b) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce dual citizenship; (c) exercise of the rights, privileges, or obligations of foreign citizenship occurred before the individual became a U.S. citizen or when the individual was a minor; and (e) the passport has been destroyed, surrendered to the cognizant security authority, or otherwise invalidated.

For Applicant

Foreign Citizenship Acquisition or Application

Admitted

(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country

(b) dual citizenship is based solely on parental citizenship or birth in a foreign country, and there is no evidence of foreign preference

(c) the individual has expressed a willingness to renounce the foreign citizenship that is in conflict with U.S. national security interests

(e) the exercise of the entitlements or benefits of foreign citizenship do not present a national security concern

Claimed

Other

1.c–1.d

2 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (for the applicant).

For Applicant

—

Loading case…

Case Profile

Summary

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Conditions Referenced

Key Rule Quoted

Procedural Posture

Cite For

Full decision

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

APPEARANCES

STATEMENT OF CASE

FINDINGS OF FACT

POLICIES

ANALYSIS

WHOLE PERSON CONCEPT

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES