ISCR Case 14-03068.h1

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 14-03068.h1

grantedMar 31, 2015· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

The applicant, a 38-year-old defense contractor and U.S. citizen originally from India, sought a security clearance under Guideline B concerning foreign influence due to family ties in India and Malaysia. The judge found that the applicant's strong ties to the U.S., including his citizenship and substantial assets, mitigated the foreign influence concerns, leading to a granted decision.

Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Applicant’s parents and brother are citizens and residents of India (1.a). Applicant’s family members are not affiliated with the Indian government (1.b). Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of Malaysia (1.c). Applicant’s wife has two sisters and a brother, one sister is a citizen of Malaysia and a resident of India (1.d). Applicant purchased a parcel of land in India in 2013 as an investment property (1.e). Applicant has a bank account in India that he uses when he visits (1.f).

The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions AG ¶ 7(a), AG ¶ 7(b), AG ¶ 7(d), AG ¶ 7(e). The judge applied mitigating conditions AG ¶ 8(a), AG ¶ 8(b). The decision turned on the following: The applicant demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through citizenship and family; The applicant's foreign relatives were not affiliated with their governments, reducing risk of coercion; The applicant's financial interests and assets were primarily in the U.S.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant demonstrated strong ties to the U.S. through citizenship and family.
The applicant's foreign relatives were not affiliated with their governments, reducing risk of coercion.
The applicant's financial interests and assets were primarily in the U.S.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 7(a)raisedContact with Foreign Family Members
AG ¶ 7(b)raisedConnections to Foreign Persons Creating Potential Conflict of Interest
AG ¶ 7(d)notedSharing Living Quarters with Foreign Persons
AG ¶ 7(e)rejectedSubstantial Business or Financial Interest in a Foreign CountryThe applicant no longer owned land in India.

Mitigating

AG ¶ 8(a)appliedNature of Relationships with Foreign Persons Unlikely to Create Conflict
AG ¶ 8(b)appliedNo Conflict of Interest Due to Strong U.S. Ties

Key Rule Quoted

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

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedAug 8, 2014
Answer filedSep 3, 2014
Hearing heldJan 21, 2015
Decision dateMar 31, 2015

Cite For

Mitigation of Foreign Influence Concerns Under Guideline B
Consideration of Family Ties in Security Clearance Decisions
Whole-person Concept in Evaluating Security Clearance Eligibility

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
1.a	Applicant’s parents and brother are citizens and residents of India.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.b	Applicant’s family members are not affiliated with the Indian government.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	India	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.c	Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of Malaysia.	For Applicant	In Law in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Malaysia	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.d	Applicant’s wife has two sisters and a brother, one sister is a citizen of Malaysia and a resident of India.	For Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Extended Family	Malaysia, India	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely (b) deep/longstanding U.S. loyalties; conflict resolves in favor of the U.S.	Claimed Deep U.S. Ties
1.e	Applicant purchased a parcel of land in India in 2013 as an investment property.	For Applicant	Foreign Real Estate Financial or Property Interest	India	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	—	Documented Foreign Assets Divested
1.f	Applicant has a bank account in India that he uses when he visits.	For Applicant	Foreign Bank Account or Investment Financial or Property Interest	India	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation (b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest (d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk	—	Documented Foreign Assets Divested

Allegation

Finding

Relationship

Country

Response

Disqualifying (¶7)

Mitigating applied (¶8)

Mitigation

1.a

Applicant’s parents and brother are citizens and residents of India.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

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

Claimed

Deep U.S. Ties

1.b

Applicant’s family members are not affiliated with the Indian government.

For Applicant

Parent in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

India

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

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

Claimed

Deep U.S. Ties

1.c

Applicant’s mother-in-law is a citizen and resident of Malaysia.

For Applicant

In Law in Foreign Country

Immediate Family

Malaysia

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

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

Claimed

Deep U.S. Ties

1.d

Applicant’s wife has two sisters and a brother, one sister is a citizen of Malaysia and a resident of India.

For Applicant

Sibling in Foreign Country

Extended Family

Malaysia, India

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely

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

Claimed

Deep U.S. Ties

1.e

Applicant purchased a parcel of land in India in 2013 as an investment property.

For Applicant

Foreign Real Estate

Financial or Property Interest

India

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

—

Documented

Foreign Assets Divested

1.f

Applicant has a bank account in India that he uses when he visits.

For Applicant

Foreign Bank Account or Investment

Financial or Property Interest

India

Denied

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

(b) connections creating a potential conflict of interest

(d) counterintelligence information indicating unacceptable risk

—

Documented

Foreign Assets Divested

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