Marleny Casas v. USCIS District Director Miami ( 2013 )

Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-15165
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:12-cv-21083-RSR
MARLENY CASAS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
USCIS DISTRICT DIRECTOR MIAMI,
SECRETARY, US DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
US ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(May 1, 2013)
Before HULL, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 2 of 3
Marleny Casas, a native and citizen of Cuba, appeals the summary judgment
in favor of the District Director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,
the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and the Attorney General
of the United States. After the entry of a final order of removal against her, Casas
complained that the denial of her second application for an adjustment of status
under the Cuban Adjustment Act, Pub. L. 89-732, 80 Stat. 1161 (1966), violated
the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706, and she sought relief under the
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201, and the Mandamus Act, id. § 1361.
Casas argues that a genuine factual dispute exists about whether she presented a
fraudulent passport to an immigration inspector and that dispute barred summary
judgment in favor of the defendants. We affirm.
The district court did not err. Casas misunderstands the standard of review
of an agency action. Under the Administrative Procedures Act, the “task of the
reviewing court is to apply the appropriate APA standard of review . . . to the
agency decision based on the record [provided by] the agency.” Florida Power &
Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729, 743–44, 105 S. Ct. 1598, 1607 (1985). The
administrative record establishes, as the district court concluded, that the agency
based its decision to deny Casas’s application for adjustment of status on
substantial evidence that she submitted a fraudulent passport to immigration
officials. The question before the district court was whether that decision of the
2
Case: 12-15165 Date Filed: 05/01/2013 Page: 3 of 3
agency was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. Casas cannot relitigate
de novo the underlying factual dispute that the agency resolved.
We AFFIRM the summary judgment in favor of the defendants.
3