Juan Manuel Delgado v. Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al.

Delgado v. Mullin · United States District Court for the District of Hawaii · June 17, 2026 · No. Civ. No. 24-00560 JMS-RT; 1:24-cv-00560

Summary

The court grants defendants’ motion to dismiss Juan Manuel Delgado’s petition for de novo review of the denial of his naturalization application under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c). It holds that exhaustion of administrative remedies under § 1421(c) is prudential rather than jurisdictional and that requiring further exhaustion would be futile. The court concludes that Delgado cannot state a claim because he was not lawfully admitted for permanent residence and the denial of his I-751 petition must be reviewed in removal proceedings rather than in the district court.

Holdings

  1. The exhaustion requirement associated with § 1421(c) is prudential rather than jurisdictional.
  2. The court excused exhaustion because another N-336 review would be futile.
  3. Termination of Delgado's conditional permanent resident status while his N-400 application was pending rendered him ineligible for naturalization.
  4. A district court reviewing a naturalization denial under § 1421(c) may not review the denial or termination of an I-751 petition; that determination must be reviewed in removal proceedings before an immigration judge.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether exhaustion of administrative remedies under 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c) is jurisdictional or prudential.
  2. Whether the court should excuse exhaustion because requiring Delgado to pursue another N-336 administrative review would be futile.
  3. Whether a district court reviewing a naturalization denial under § 1421(c) may review USCIS's termination or denial of an I-751 petition.
  4. Whether termination of Delgado's conditional permanent resident status while his N-400 application was pending rendered him ineligible for naturalization.

Disposition

dismissed

Cases Cited (42)

  • United States v. Ritchie, 342 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2003)(followed)
  • Khoja v. Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., 899 F.3d 988, 1002-03 (9th Cir. 2018)(followed)
  • Marder v. Lopez, 450 F.3d 445, 448 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
  • Pell v. Nuñez, 99 F.4th 1128, 1133 (9th Cir. 2024)(followed)
  • Shroyer v. New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., 622 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009)(followed)
  • Dent v. National Football League, 968 F.3d 1126, 1130 (9th Cir. 2020)(followed)
  • Chubb Custom Insurance Co. v. Space Systems/Loral, Inc., 710 F.3d 946, 956 (9th Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wheeler, 899 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2018)(followed)
  • McCarthy v. Madigan, 503 U.S. 140, 145-46 (1992)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 42.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…