CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 03-22052.h1 — CASE

ISCR Case 03-22052.h1granted

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 03-22052.h1

grantedAug 15, 2005· Hon. Joseph Testan· hearing

Summary

The applicant, a 27-year-old U.S. citizen originally from Hong Kong, sought a security clearance despite his father's British citizenship and residence in Hong Kong. The judge found that the applicant successfully rebutted the Government's prima facie case of foreign influence by demonstrating that his father does not present a security risk. Consequently, the applicant was granted clearance under Guideline B.

Under Guideline B (Foreign Influence), the Statement of Reasons alleged the following: Your father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and currently resides in Hong Kong (1.a).

The judge granted the clearance. The government raised disqualifying conditions E2.A2.1.2.1. The judge applied mitigating conditions E2.A2.1.3.1. The decision turned on the following: The applicant presented convincing evidence that his father does not present a security risk; The applicant's father is not an agent of Hong Kong and cannot be exploited to force a loyalty conflict; The applicant's family ties in the U.S. and their plans to remain in the country were significant mitigating factors.

Why the Applicant Prevailed

The applicant presented convincing evidence that his father does not present a security risk.
The applicant's father is not an agent of Hong Kong and cannot be exploited to force a loyalty conflict.
The applicant's family ties in the U.S. and their plans to remain in the country were significant mitigating factors.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

E2.A2.1.2.1raisedForeign Influence

Mitigating

E2.A2.1.3.1appliedForeign InfluenceThe immediate family member is not an agent of a foreign power or in a position to be exploited.

Key Rule Quoted

“It is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedSep 15, 2004
Answer filedOct 13, 2004
Hearing heldMay 20, 2005
Decision dateAug 15, 2005

Cite For

Rebuttal of Prima Facie Case Under Guideline B
Mitigating Factors Related to Family Ties and Foreign Influence
Evaluation of Foreign Family Members' Potential Security Risks

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: granted

The judge found that the applicant's father is a British citizen residing in Hong Kong, which initially raised concerns under Guideline B. However, the applicant successfully demonstrated that his father does not present a security risk, leading to a ruling in favor of the applicant. Consequently, the security clearance was granted.

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	Your father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and currently resides in Hong Kong.	For Applicant	Parent in Foreign Country Immediate Family	United Kingdom	Denied with Explanation	(e) shared living quarters creating a heightened risk	(a) relationships such that a conflict between foreign and U.S. interests is unlikely	Claimed Other

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

Full decision

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

Decision text, by section

DEFENSE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS

HEARING

SYNOPSIS

KEYWORD: Foreign Influence

DIGEST: The Government established a prima facie case under Guideline B based on the fact applicant's father is a British citizen residing in Hong Kong. The applicant has, however, presented convincing evidence that his father does not present a security risk. I therefore conclude that applicant has rebutted the Government's prima facie case. Clearance is granted.

CASENO: 03-22052.h1

DATE: 08/15/2005

DATE: August 15, 2005

In Re:

-------------

SSN: -----------

Applicant for Security Clearance

ISCR Case No. 03-22052

DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

JOSEPH TESTAN

APPEARANCES

SYNOPSIS

The Government established a prima facie case under Guideline B based on the fact applicant's father is a British citizen residing in Hong Kong. The applicant has, however, presented convincing evidence that his father does not present a security risk. I therefore conclude that applicant has rebutted the Government's prima facie case. Clearance is granted.

STATEMENT OF CASE

On September 15, 2004, the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), pursuant to Executive Order 10865 and Department of Defense Directive 5220.6 (Directive), dated January 2, 1992, issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) to applicant which detailed reasons why DOHA could not make the preliminary affirmative finding under the Directive that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant and recommended referral to an Administrative Judge to determine whether clearance should be denied or revoked.

Applicant responded to the SOR in writing on October 13, 2004. The case was assigned to the undersigned on March 29, 2005. A Notice of Hearing was issued on April 7, 2005, and the hearing was held on May 20, 2005. The transcript was received on June 6, 2005. RULINGS ON PROCEDURE

At the hearing SOR Allegation 1a was amended. As amended, SOR Allegation 1a is as follows:

1a. Your father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and currently resides in Hong Kong.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Applicant is 27 years of age.

Applicant was born in Hong Kong. In 1990, when applicant was 12 years old, he, his parents, and brother moved to the United States. They made the move because of the uncertainty involved with Hong Kong being turned over to the Peoples Republic of China (PRC).

Applicant attended middle school and high school in the United States. Following his graduation from high school, he attended a four year university in the United States. From the time he received his degree to the present time, he has worked in the United States. He became a United States citizen in 1996 because he is "set on spending the rest of [his] life in the United States" (TR at 39).

Applicant's father has worked for a large and successful company based in Hong Kong (1) since before applicant was born. Within a month or two of moving his family to the United States, he moved back to Hong Kong to continue with his job. Applicant speaks with him an average of once a month. The father is a British citizen. He plans on retiring in two years and then moving back to the United States to live with his family. Applicant's mother will be sponsoring him (Exhibit I). When he is eligible he will be applying for United States citizenship (Exhibit G). Applicant's mother and brother still live in the United States, both are United States citizens, and both plan on remaining in the United States. Applicant has a grandmother, aunt and uncle (on his father's side) who are United States citizens living in the United States. Applicant's parents have substantial assets in the United States, including two houses, bank accounts and mutual funds (Exhibit J).

Applicant testified credibly that if he were ever approached by anyone looking for classified information he would report the approach to his security department.

Applicant's supervisor at his place of employment appeared at the hearing and testified on applicant's behalf. She testified that applicant has an excellent work ethic, is highly regarded by coworkers and supervisors, and is reliable, dependable, and trustworthy.

CONCLUSION

Although applicant, his mother and brother are United States citizens living in the United States, applicant's father is a British citizen residing in Hong Kong. This fact requires application of Disqualifying Condition E2.A2.1.2.1 (an immediate family member, or a person to whom the individual has close ties of affection or obligation, is a citizen of, or resident of or present in, a foreign country).

Based on the evidence presented, I conclude that applicant's father is not an agent of Hong Kong. I further conclude that he is not in a position to be exploited by Hong Kong in a way that could force applicant to choose between loyalty to him and loyalty to the United States. Based on the foregoing, Mitigating Condition E2.A2.1.3.1 (a determination that the immediate family member(s) . . . in question are not agents of a foreign power or in a position to be exploited by a foreign power in a way that could force the individual to choose between loyalty to the person(s) involved and the United States) is applicable to this case. Based on the evidence as a whole, I conclude that applicant's evidence was sufficient to overcome the Government's prima facie case.

FORMAL FINDINGS

GUIDELINE B: FOR THE APPLICANT

DECISION

In light of all the circumstances presented by the record in this case, it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant or continue a security clearance for applicant.

____________________________

Joseph Testan

Administrative Judge

1. The company is now owned by a corporation based in a democratic country that is one of America's closest allies.

FOOTNOTES

FOR GOVERNMENT file:///usr.osd.mil/...yComputer/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/industrial/Archived%20-%20HTML/03-22052.h1.htm[7/2/2021 3:15:43 PM] Jennifer I. Campbell, Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT William F. Savarino, Esq.