U.S. Citizenship Non-Precedent Decision of the and Immigration Administrative Appeals Office Services MATTER OF N-J-H- DATE: NOV.21.2017 APPEAL OF VERMONT SERVICE CENTER DECISION APPLICATION: FORM l-821. APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS The Applicant. who claims to be a national and citizen of Somalia. seeks revie·w of a decision withdrawing his Temporary Protected Status (TPS). See Immigration and Nationality Act section 244, 8 U.S.C. § 1254a. TPS provides lawful status and protection from removal for foreign nationals, of specifically designated countries. who timely register (and then periodically re-register) during designated periods, satisfy residence and physical presence requirements. are admissible to the United States, were not finnly resettled in another country. and are not subject to certain criminal- and security-related bars. The Director of the Vermont Service Center denied the application for re-registration and withdrew the Applicant's TPS finding that the Applicant was ineligible for TPS because he did not establish identity and Sorriali nationality. On appeal, the Applicant asserts that the Director's decision was in error and that the evidence he submitted proves his true identity and demonstrates he is a national of Somalia. Upon de novo review. we will dismiss the appeal. I. LAW The Director may withdraw TPS if the applicant was not in fact eligible at the time TPS was granted or later becomes ineligible. 8 C.F.R. § 244.14(a)(l). The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 244.9(a), requires a TPS applicant to provide evidence of his or her identity, if available. Acceptable evidence of identity and nationality may consist of a passport a birth certificate accompanied by photo identification. or any national identity document from the foreign national's country of origin bearing a photo. fingerprint, or both. !d. If these documents arc unavailable, an applicant must file an affidavit showing proof of unsuccessful efTorts to obtain such identity documents, explaining why the consular process is unavailable, and aftirming that he or she is a national of the designated foreign state. !d. A personal interview before an immigration ofticer shall be required for each applicant who does not provide documentary proof of identity or nationality. !d During this interview. the applicant may present any secondary evidence that he or she feels would be helpful in showing nationality. !d. Alaller ofN-.1-H- The burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. See Matter olChmvathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 2010). Applicants shall submit all documentation as required in the instructions or requested by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). 8 C.F.R. § 244.9(a). The sufficiency of all evidence will be judged according to its relevancy, consistency, credibility. and probative value. 8 C.F.R. ~ 244.9(b). To meet the burden of proof, the applicant must provide supporting documentary evidence of eligibility apart from his or her own statements. /d. II. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The Applicant claims he was admitted to the United States in June 1999 at Texas. under an assumed name with a fraudulently obtained Dutch passport. In July 1999, the Applicant applied for asylum in the United States and submitted, in part, three affidavits from family friends to establish identity. The application was denied, in part, because the Applicant provided inconsistent testimony on points related to his claimed Somali clan membership, thus raising questions as to his identity and overall credibility. To establish identity in subsequent removal proceedings. the Applicant submitted copies of his bi11h certificate in English and Somali, purportedly issued in in 1987. and three identity affidavits. The Immigration Judge. however, found the Applicant's testimony, and the affidavits inconsistent, denied his request for political asylum and withholding of removal. and ordered the Applicant removed to Somalia. The Board of Immigration Appeals atlirmed the Immigration Judge's decision in 2003. The Applicant subsequently applied for and was granted TPS as a national of Somalia in 2004. In 2015, the Director issued a notice of intent to deny the Applicant's re-registration application and to withdraw his TPS, advising the Applicant that the testimony he previously provided raised concerns about his identity and nationality, and the circumstances under which he obtained the Somali hirth certificate were not clear. The Director requested the Applicant to submit, in part. additional documents to establish identity, including a passport; a timely-registered birth certificate issued by the appropriate civil authority; and photo identification documents. such as a national identification card. The Applicant's response included his personal statement original Somali passport, secondary school leaving certificate, and an affidavit from a friend attesting to his identity. The Applicant \Vas also interviewed in person at the USCIS Field Office about the identity documents he provided. As stated above, the Director found the evidence of identity and nationality insufficient and \vithdrcw the Applicant's TPS. III. ANALYSIS The issue before us is whether the evidence is sufficient to establish the Applicant"s identity and Somali nationality, as required under designation of TPS for Somalia. The Director determined that the Applicant did not meet his burden of proof because he provided inconsistent testimony in asylum and removal proceedings; he did not adequately explain how he obtained the Somali birth certificate af1er arriving in the United States: and he did not show that his 2 . Matter of N-J-H- Somali passport, issued in in 2008, years after the government of Somalia ceased to exist, was a valid document. The Director further found that because one of the affiants attesting to the Applicant's identity was younger than the Applicant, that individual could not have had personal knowledge about the Applicant's time and place of birth. The Applicant states on appeal that his testimony in removal proceedings may have appeared inconsistent because of sub-par translation, and that the original documents he submitted, including his birth and school ce1iificates, constitute indisputable evidence of his identity and Somali nationality. The Applicant claims ftniher that, despite the Director's concerns regarding the validity of his Somali passport, it is very unlikely it was forged because the nevv Somali government opened a forgery-proof passport ot1ice in in 2002. Lastly, the Applicant argues that the Director improperly considered only one identity affidavit, and did not afTord any weight to the three affidavits he previously provided in suppmi of his asylum request. We have reviewed the entire record and, for the reasons discussed below. tind that the documents the Applicant presented are insufficient to establish his true identity and Somali nationality in view of other evidence which indicates they may not be genuine. A. Birth Certificate and Secondary School Leaving Certificate The Applicant sates that the above original documents issued in 1987 and 1990. respectively. establish his true identity and Somali nationality. However. the Applicant's testimony and other evidence in the record raise doubts about their authenticity. First, the Applicant's testimony about how he obtained the birth certificate is inconsistent. He states on appeal that he entered the United States with his original birth certificate. which he submitted to the Immigration Court for the 2001 removal hearing. He claims that because this original certificate was not returned to him, he subsequently had to request a second copy through a friend in Somalia. However, the record reflects that when the Applicant first applied for asylum in 1999. he indicated that he did not have any identity documents and instead submitted three affidavits attesting to his name, date, and place of birth. He confirmed this in a 2015 affidavit, stating that he did not obtain identity documents until three months after his asylum interview which, as the record reflects, took place in December 1999. Moreover, the Applicant testified at the 2015 interview that he first acquired the birth certificate "from back home" sometime in 2001. 1 However. at the removal hearing in 2001 he claimed that he had no contact with any of his family or clan members since his arrival in the United States in 1999. Accordingly, it is not clear when and hmv the Applicant obtained the birth certificate. Moreover, it appears that the birth certificate, purportedly issued in in 1987, may not be a genuine document. The Applicant has submitted copies of the certificate in English and Somali. The certificate bears English language seals, stamps, and annotation. However. according to an 1 The record shows that the Applicant submitted the birth certificate to the immigration court in 200 I. Matter of N-.1-H- Immigration and Naturalization Service Resource Information Center 2000 rcport,2 the shift to the Somali language in all official documentation in Somalia in the early to mid- 1970s would render English "quite unusual'' on a Somali birth certificate issued between 1973 and 1991. The same report states that in absence of an official government in Somalia, it was very easy to obtain documents in Somali marketplaces, but these documents were for purposes such as international travel and were worthless in Somalia. According to other sources.-' identity documents were not being issued anywhere in Somalia in 2001 and, although some local administrations were issuing birth certificates, passports, and similar documents. they were not issued under any recognized authority and were not verifiable. This information. when considered in the context of the Applicant's conflicting testimony about when and how he obtained the bitih certificate, raises concerns regarding the document's authenticity. We find therefore that under these circumstances the birth certificate is insutlicient to prove identity and nationality. The Applicant has also submitted an original secondary school leaving certificate, dated in 1990.