Ange Samma v. DOD

136 F.4th 1108 (D.C. Cir. 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · May 9, 2025 · No. 20-5320

Summary

This D.C. Circuit opinion addresses whether an appeal challenging the Department of Defense’s time-in-service requirement for expedited military naturalization is moot after the agency rescinded the policy during litigation. The court concludes that the case is moot because the rescinded policy no longer affects the parties’ rights and the voluntary-cessation exception does not apply. Consequently, the court vacates the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and remands with instructions to dismiss the appeal as moot.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Writing for the Court
HENDERSON; PAN; RANDOLPH
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Decision date
May 9, 2025
Docket number
20-5320
Procedural posture
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:20-cv-01104)
Precedential value
published
Parties
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND PETE HEGSETH, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF DEFENSE v. ANGE SAMMA, ET AL.
Disposition
vacated

Topics

mootnessadministrative lawimmigrationappellate procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

administrative lawimmigrationcivil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the appeal is moot after DoD rescinded the 2017 policy
  2. Whether vacatur of the district court judgment is appropriate under Munsingwear doctrine

Holdings

  1. The appeal is moot because the challenged policy has been rescinded and no live controversy remains; the voluntary‑cessation doctrine does not apply.
  2. Vacatur of the district court judgment is appropriate because the case became moot through circumstances not attributable to the parties, and equitable considerations favor vacatur.

Key quotations

Because no one is subject to the 2017 Policy in light of its rescission, the class is empty. The injunction, therefore, does not impose any further restraint on DoD. (at 263)
Vacatur is ordinarily appropriate once a case is moot because it “clears the path for future relitigation of the issues between the parties and eliminates a judgment, review of which was prevented through happenstance.” United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U.S. 36, 40 (1950). (at 264-80)

Factual background

In 2017 DoD issued a policy requiring non‑citizen servicemembers to complete 180 days of active duty or one year of reserve service before the department could certify honorable service for expedited naturalization under 8 U.S.C. §§ 1439 and 1440. Plaintiffs sued under the APA alleging the policy was arbitrary, capricious, and unlawful. The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs and enjoined the policy. While the appeal was pending, DoD rescinded the policy and did not replace it.

Procedural history

The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, vacated DoD's time‑in‑service requirement and enjoined DoD from withholding N‑426 certifications. DoD appealed, then rescinded the policy, rendering the case moot. The D.C. Circuit held the appeal moot, declined the voluntary‑cessation exception, and vacated the district court judgment, remanding with instructions to dismiss as moot.

Remand instructions

Dismiss the case as moot.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…