Skip to content
← Decisions by country

Decisions by country · Guideline B · Foreign Influence

Ties to India in decided clearance cases

What the decided public record shows for cases in which ties to India were alleged. Ties to any country are not themselves disqualifying, and every case turns on its own facts. This is decided history, not a prediction, and it says nothing about any nationality or community.

Decided cases

213

hearing-level decisions naming this country in the text

Granted

75%

160 granted · 53 denied or revoked

Ties living in the United States

at least 27

decisions stating expressly that the relative or contact lives in the United States, so this is a floor

The ties these cases involved

The kinds of relationship identified on India allegations in these cases. A case can involve several, and the bars count cases rather than outcomes, so they carry no colour.
Parent in foreign country161 cases
Sibling in foreign country117 cases
Foreign real estate94 cases
In law in foreign country89 cases
Unspecified foreign relationship73 cases
Foreign bank account or investment66 cases
Extended family in foreign country32 cases

Circumstances credited in granted cases

Circumstances the judge expressly credited among granted India cases where that detail was extracted. Extraction covers a subset of the record, so these are raw counts and not rates.
  • deep U.S. ties · credited in 67 granted cases
  • foreign assets divested · credited in 2 granted cases
  • severed foreign contact · credited in 1 granted case

Recent decided examples

  • Applicant, a senior manager for a government contractor, mitigated Guideline B concerns arising from family ties, property, and bank accounts in India. He had lived in the United States for about two …

  • The applicant in this case was a 53-year-old naturalized U.S. citizen originally from India, who applied for a security clearance in connection with his employment in the defense industry. The Departm…

  • Applicant, a naturalized U.S. citizen and pro se, was denied eligibility for a security clearance. The judge found Guideline B concerns based on his wife’s Indian citizenship and parents in India, his…

  • The applicant in this case was a 52-year-old chief technology officer employed by a federal contractor since 2018. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) issued a Statement of Reas…

Search all Guideline B decisions mentioning India

Other countries in the record

How these numbers are measured

Scope: decided hearing-level cases whose Guideline B allegations name this country. The country field is free text in the source, so the variants observed in the record are mapped onto one canonical name and nothing is guessed; records naming several countries in one field are excluded rather than split. A case naming two countries counts once under each. Counts of country risk and of ties living in the United States are counted only where the decision says so expressly, so both are floors. Pages exist only for countries with at least 25 decided cases.

Reading the statistics

  • Granted = access granted or continued; Denied = denied or revoked.
  • Grant rate = granted ÷ (granted + denied).
  • † marks figures based on fewer than 20 cases, too few to be reliable.
  • Hovering any rate shows its statistical range (a 95% confidence interval).
  • Figures are descriptive counts over decided, public DOHA ISCR decisions, never predictions or assessments of any pending case.

Where to go from here

Get help with my case

Send us your question, or the Statement of Reasons you received. No charge, and a CASE analyst reads it. Usually five to ten business days.

Ask a question →

I do this for clients

Rank every decision by how closely it matches a matter, see how the assigned judge has ruled, and keep it together with cited exports.

For attorneys and firms →

Decided public cases: descriptive, never a prediction.