CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 08-11799.h1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 08-11799.h1

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

Case Profile
Decision Date9/10/2010
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Darlene D. Lokey-Anderson
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Case Summary
The judge found that the applicant's foreign contacts, specifically his parents residing in Iran, posed a significant security risk due to the potential for foreign influence. The applicant's dual citizenship and regular communication with his family in Iran were deemed to create a heightened risk of exploitation. Consequently, the judge ruled against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline B.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · Unknown Outcome
- Guideline CForeign Preference · Unknown Outcome
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. 08-11799.h1

deniedSep 10, 2010· Hon. Darlene D. Lokey-Anderson· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old dual citizen of Iran and the United States was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The Statement of Reasons alleged that the applicant's foreign contacts could create a potential for foreign influence, and that his actions demonstrated a preference for another country over the United States.

Specifically, the applicant obtained an Iranian passport in 1976 and renewed it in May 2004, using it for travel to Iran in March or April 2005 to visit his parents. Although the passport expired in May 2009, he did not destroy it, instead giving it to his company's security officer for safekeeping. The applicant stated he maintained his dual citizenship and passport to facilitate travel to Iran for potential medical emergencies involving his aging parents and to avoid harassment from the Iranian government.

The denial was based on the applicant's regular telephonic contact with his parents in Iran, which raised concerns about foreign influence. Furthermore, his retention of an Iranian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen was seen as an indication of a preference for Iran over the United States.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant has regular telephonic contact with his parents in Iran, creating a potential for foreign influence.
The applicant retained an Iranian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen, indicating a preference for Iran over the U.S.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

B.7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
C.10(a)raisedExercise of Foreign Citizenship Rights

Key Rule Quoted

“Eligibility for access to classified information is predicted upon the individual meeting these personnel security guidelines.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 6, 2009
Answer filedSep 2, 2009Applicant elected to proceed without a hearing.
Hearing held—Written record only.
Decision dateSep 10, 2010

Cite For

Security Concerns Related to Foreign Influence Due to Family Ties
Implications of Dual Citizenship on Security Clearance Eligibility
Impact of Retaining a Foreign Passport After U.S. Citizenship

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline B (Foreign Influence) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant's foreign contacts, specifically his parents residing in Iran, posed a significant security risk due to the potential for foreign influence. The applicant's dual citizenship and regular communication with his family in Iran were deemed to create a heightened risk of exploitation. Consequently, the judge ruled against the applicant on all allegations under Guideline B.

Country conditions:the decision took administrative notice of official facts about the foreign country (the Government’s country submission).

U.S. ties the decision noted: Naturalized U.S. Citizen · U.S. Spouse or Partner · U.S. Home or Property · U.S. Career or Business

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
1.a	The Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has foreign contacts that could create the potential for foreign influence, which could result in the compromise of classified information.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Iran HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
2.a	The Applicant is ineligible for clearance because he has acted in such a way as to show a preference for another country over the United States.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Relationship Other	Iran HEIGHTENED RISK	Unknown	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline B). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline C (Foreign Preference) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The Applicant demonstrated foreign preference by applying for and using an Iranian passport after becoming a U.S. citizen. The judge found that the Applicant's actions indicated a preference for Iran over the United States, particularly due to his unwillingness to renounce his Iranian citizenship. Consequently, the judge ruled against the Applicant under Guideline C.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶10)	Mitigating applied (¶11)	Mitigation
2.a	The Applicant applied for and obtained an Iranian passport in 1976, for the purposes of traveling to Iran. After becoming a United States citizen in 1999, he renewed his Iranian passport in May 2004, and used it to enter and exit Iran in March or April 2005, during his travel to Iran to visit his parents. His Iranian passport expired in May 2009. When learning of DoD’s policy concerning possession of a foreign passport, the Applicant gave his passport to the security officer at his company for safekeeping, to be returned when needed. He has not destroyed his Iranian passport. The Applicant states, “I have maintained my dual citizenships [sic] only to enable me to travel to Iran in cases of medical emergencies that may occur due to the aging of my parents”. In fact, he indicates that he would not renounce his Iranian citizenship because he wants the ability to travel to Iran to visit his parents without being harassed by the Iranian government.	Against Applicant	Foreign Passport Possession or Use	Admitted	(a) applying for and/or acquiring citizenship in any other country	—	—
2.a	specific text not stated in this decision	Against Applicant	Unspecified Foreign Preference	Unknown	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline C). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

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