ISCR Case 08-02260.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 08-02260.h1

grantedJan 9, 2009· Hon. Michael H. Leonard· hearing

Summary

A 42-year-old U.S. citizen engineer was granted a security clearance despite initial concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons cited his dual citizenship with Nigeria and the presence of multiple family members, including three siblings, who are Nigerian citizens and residents. While his mother recently immigrated to the U.S., the applicant also had limited contact, primarily via email, with half-siblings, aside from a 2004 trip. These factors raised questions about potential foreign influence and a preference for Nigeria over the United States.

However, the applicant successfully mitigated these concerns. He formally renounced his Nigerian citizenship, submitting all required paperwork, and defaced and returned his Nigerian passport to demonstrate his intent to sever ties.

Crucially, the applicant established that his strongest family ties are within the United States, where his wife and children reside. These actions and demonstrated connections led the judge to conclude that the security risks were sufficiently mitigated, resulting in a favorable decision to grant the clearance.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

Applicant renounced his Nigerian citizenship and submitted the necessary paperwork to do so.
He defaced and returned his Nigerian passport, demonstrating intent to sever ties with Nigeria.
The applicant's strongest family ties are to the U.S., including his wife and children.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

DC 1raisedExercise of Foreign CitizenshipApplicant's possession of a Nigerian passport raised security concerns.
DC 1raisedContact with Foreign Family MembersApplicant has family members residing in Nigeria.
DC 2raisedConnections to Foreign PersonsApplicant's family ties create potential for foreign influence.

Mitigating

MC 2appliedWillingness to Renounce Dual CitizenshipApplicant completed and submitted paperwork to renounce Nigerian citizenship.
MC 5appliedPassport Has Been InvalidatedApplicant defaced and returned his Nigerian passport.
MC 2appliedMinimal Conflict of InterestApplicant has deep loyalty to the U.S. and strong family ties here.

Key Rule Quoted

“"No one has a 'right' to a security clearance."”
— Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 528 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJul 3, 2008
Answer filedAug 11, 2008
Hearing heldNov 20, 2008
Decision dateJan 9, 2009

Cite For

Mitigating Conditions for Foreign Preference Under Guideline C
Mitigating Conditions for Foreign Influence Under Guideline B
Demonstrating 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 has multiple family members who are citizens of and residents in Nigeria.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
2.b	Applicant's mother, who divorced his father some years ago, recently immigrated to the U.S.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
2.c	Applicant has three siblings, an older sister and two younger brothers, who reside in Nigeria.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—
2.d	Applicant has limited contact with his half-siblings and the contact, aside from the 2004 trip, is limited to e-mail.	For Applicant	Extended Family in Foreign Country Extended Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Admitted	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	—

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

2.a

Applicant has multiple family members who are citizens of and residents in Nigeria.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Nigeria

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

2.b

Applicant's mother, who divorced his father some years ago, recently immigrated to the U.S.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Nigeria

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

2.c

Applicant has three siblings, an older sister and two younger brothers, who reside in Nigeria.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Nigeria

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

2.d

Applicant has limited contact with his half-siblings and the contact, aside from the 2004 trip, is limited to e-mail.

For Applicant

Extended Family in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Nigeria

HEIGHTENED RISK

Admitted

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

(b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.

—

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant may have acted in a way to indicate a preference for Nigeria over the United States by exercising dual citizenship.	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	—
1.b	Applicant may be subject to foreign influence due to his family ties or connections to Nigeria.	For Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	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	—
1.c–1.e	3 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 may have acted in a way to indicate a preference for Nigeria over the United States by exercising dual citizenship.

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

—

1.b

Applicant may be subject to foreign influence due to his family ties or connections to Nigeria.

For Applicant

Unspecified Foreign Preference

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

—

1.c–1.e

3 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

FORMAL FINDINGS

CONCLUSION

FOOTNOTES