Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Molson v. United States Citizenship And Immigration Services

United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

July 19, 2017

ROWENA MOLSON, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Defendant. ROWENA MOLSON, Plaintiff,
v.
GLEN PAKOV, Defendant. ROWENA MOLSON, Plaintiff,
v.
PB 18 GIRARD STATE POLICE BARRACKS, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM ORDER OF COURT

          Arthur J. Schwab United States District Judge.

         Before the Court are three separate Complaints filed in three separate cases by the same pro se Plaintiff, Rowena Molson. The Court granted Molson the right to proceed in forma pauperis in each of these three cases. However, for the reasons set forth below, each of the three cases will be dismissed as this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over any of them.

         1. Case Number 17cv103 (ERIE)

         Molson v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

         In this case, Molson alleges that she is proficient in the English language and appears to be seeking a reversal of a March 7, 2017 decision issued by U.S. Immigration and Citizenship Services ("USCIS"), denying Molson's application for naturalization. The denial was predicated, in part, on Molson's inability to achieve a passing score on the English understanding portion of the naturalization test. The decision issued by USCIS noted that Molson was interviewed by an Officer on two separate occasions, but neither time - even after repeating and rephrasing the questions - was Molson able to respond meaningfully to those questions.

         This letter which accompanied the USCIS denial decision provided Molson with information akin to an appeal process. The denial decision indicates that if Molson believed she could "overcome the grounds for the denial" (meaning her inability to achieve a passing score on the English understanding portion of the naturalization test), she had to submit a request for a hearing (Form N-336) within thirty days. The decision letter indicates and that if Molson did not file such a form, the decision would become final. This process is outlined in 8 U.S.C.A.§ 1447 and in 8 C.F.R. § 336.2.

         If Molson did file the requisite form noted above, USCIS would have 180 days from the date upon which the Form was filed to schedule a review hearing. 8 C.F.R. § 336.2(b). Because there is no indication suggesting whether or not Molson filed an appeal, and because 180 days has not yet passed from the date of the original decision, let alone the date that Molson may have filed an appeal with the USCIS, this matter is not ripe. See 8 C.F.R. § 336.9(d) (A USCIS determination denying an application for naturalization under Section 335(a) of the Act shall not be subject to judicial review until the applicant has exhausted those administrative remedies available to the applicant under section 336 of the Act.).

         Accordingly, until all administrative remedies are exhausted, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over Moslon's Complaint and this case will be dismissed and closed.

         2. Case Number 17cv104 (ERIE)

         Molson v. Pakov

         In this breach of contract case, Molson primarily alleges that her landlord owes her the return of her security deposit in the amount of $420.00. However, in this Complaint, Molson also notes that her landlord's address is in Erie, Pennsylvania (as is hers). Because both Molson and Pakov are residents of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and this matter does not reach the minimum threshold of $75, 000.00, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction. For this reason, the Court will dismiss this Complaint and close this case.[1]

         3. Case Number 17cv108 (ERIE)

         Molson v. PB 18 Girard State Police Barracks

         In this case, Molson alleges that in 2006 and 2014, she encountered police officers at her home and in her neighborhood, respectively. It appears that at least during one, if not both, of these instances, Molson was arrested and was found ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.