CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 01-04713.h1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 01-04713.h1

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

Case Profile
Decision Date11/22/2002
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: John R. Erck
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Case Summary
The judge found that the applicant's foreign influence concerns were significant due to his immediate family members being citizens and residents of Nigeria. The applicant's wife is also a Nigerian citizen residing in the U.S. The judge concluded that these ties raised security risks, leading to a denial of the security clearance.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · Unknown Outcome
- Guideline EPersonal Conduct · Unknown Outcome
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Unknown Outcome
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 01-04713.h1

deniedNov 22, 2002· Hon. John R. Erck· hearing

Summary

A 50-year-old U.S. citizen, originally from Nigeria, was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guidelines B (Foreign Influence), E (Personal Conduct), F (Financial Considerations), and J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had immediate family members who are citizens of or present in Nigeria, raising potential foreign influence concerns.

Additionally, the applicant had significant delinquent debts totaling over $40,000. These included an $8,742.53 educational debt from 1993, a disputed $30,352.00 auto loan, a $698.00 credit card debt from 1987, and a $1,200.00 debt with a judgment against him from 1992. The applicant also failed to disclose these debts and two arrests on his security questionnaire. The arrests, for obstruction of justice in May 1992 and "terrorist threat" in January 1993, were both dismissed before trial.

The administrative judge denied the clearance, citing the applicant's failure to satisfy financial obligations, his lack of candor in disclosing debts and arrests, and his family ties to Nigeria. The judge concluded there was insufficient evidence of mitigating circumstances and expressed concerns about the applicant's judgment and reliability.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant failed to satisfy financial obligations totaling over $40,000, raising concerns about financial irresponsibility.
The applicant's failure to disclose delinquent debts and arrests on the SF 86 indicated questionable judgment and untrustworthiness.
The applicant's family ties to Nigeria posed a potential risk of foreign influence.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.1.2.1raisedForeign Influence
E2.A6.1.2.1raisedFinancial Considerations
E2.A5.1.2.2raisedPersonal Conduct
E2.A10.1.2.1raisedCriminal Conduct

Key Rule Quoted

“"the clearly consistent standard indicates security clearance determinations should err, if they must, on the side of denials."”
— Department of Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 531 (1988)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedNov 29, 2001
Answer filedJan 17, 2002
Hearing heldAug 28, 2002
Decision dateNov 22, 2002

Cite For

Foreign Influence Concerns Due to Family Ties Under Guideline B
Failure to Disclose Financial Obligations and Arrests Under Guideline E
Financial Irresponsibility as a Disqualifying Condition Under Guideline F

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 influence concerns were significant due to his immediate family members being citizens and residents of Nigeria. The applicant's wife is also a Nigerian citizen residing in the U.S. The judge concluded that these ties raised security risks, leading to a denial of the security clearance.

U.S. ties the decision noted: Naturalized U.S. Citizen · U.S. Spouse or Partner

¶	Allegation	Finding	Relationship	Country	Response	Disqualifying (¶7)	Mitigating applied (¶8)	Mitigation
3.a	An immediate family member, or a person to whom the individual has close ties of affection or obligation, is a citizen of, or present in, a foreign country.	For Applicant	Spouse Dual or Foreign Citizen Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
3.b	An immediate family member, or a person to whom the individual has close ties of affection or obligation, is a citizen of, or present in, a foreign country.	Against Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(a) contact with a foreign family member/associate/friend creating a heightened risk of exploitation	—	—
3.c	An immediate family member, or a person to whom the individual has close ties of affection or obligation, is a citizen of, or present in, a foreign country.	Against Applicant	Sibling in Foreign Country Immediate Family	Nigeria HEIGHTENED RISK	Denied	(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 E (Personal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant's personal conduct raised security concerns due to his failure to disclose delinquent debts and arrests on his security questionnaire. The judge concluded against the applicant on these issues, indicating a lack of candor and questionable judgment.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Conduct	Concealed Issue	Response	Disqualifying (¶16)	Mitigating applied (¶17)	Mitigation
2.a–2.c	3 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (1 against, 2 for the applicant).	Mixed		—		—	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had significant financial concerns, including multiple delinquent debts totaling over $40,000. The applicant's failure to disclose these debts on his security clearance application contributed to the denial of his clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	An indebtedness of $8,742.53 to Creditor A, a government agency in State X. Applicant borrowed this money to obtain an education. He completed his studies for an associates degree in 1993 and has made minimal progress since then in paying off this obligation. Creditor A obtained a judgment against Applicant on this debt in February 1994. $8,742	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.b	An indebtedness to Creditor B, a financial subsidiary of a major U.S. automobile manufacturer. Applicant admits financing an automobile with Creditor B, but denies being indebted by the amount ($30,352.00) alleged. $30,352	For Applicant	Auto Loan Debt	Denied	—	—	—
1.c	An indebtedness of $698.00 to Creditor C, a bank; this indebtedness appears to have been incurred on a credit card account opened in 1987. $698	Against Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Denied	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—
1.d	An indebtedness of $1,200.00 to Creditor D (a bank and travel company). Creditor D obtained a judgment against Applicant in October 1992. $1,200	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (b) unwillingness to satisfy debts regardless of ability	—	—

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: Decision on RecordDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on the Guideline J allegations, concluding that the applicant's history of criminal conduct raised concerns about his judgment and reliability. The applicant's failure to disclose two arrests on his security questionnaire further contributed to the negative assessment, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
4.a	Applicant was arrested in May 1992 and charged with obstruction of justice. In January 1993, he was arrested and charged with "terrorist threat" in violation of a state statute. Both matters were dismissed before going to trial.	Against Applicant	Unspecified Criminal Conduct	Dismissed or Nolle Prossed	Denied	—	—	—

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

Full decision

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