United States v. Salem

Citation496 F.Supp.3d 1167
Decision Date26 October 2020
Docket NumberCase No. 19-cv-2729
Parties UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Wail Talab SALEM a/k/a Wael Talah, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

Gover Nicole P. Grant, Department of Justice-Office of Immigration Litigation, Joshua Samuel Press, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff.

Alan R. Bruggeman, David C. Hurst, Bruggeman Hurst & Associates PC, Mokena, IL, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Steven C. Seeger, United States District Judge

Salem applied for U.S. citizenship while in the midst of committing a crime spree. He stole millions of dollars from the federal government's food stamp program, which feeds the needy. He made no mention of his long-running, multi-million-dollar theft when he represented to the Immigration and Naturalization Service that he was a law-abiding resident. The federal government took him at his word, and granted his request to become a U.S. citizen.

Salem defrauded the government that granted him citizenship. But the fraud ultimately caught up with him. He was indicted a few years later, and before long he pleaded guilty to twelve counts, including mail fraud, food stamp fraud, identity document fraud, and tax obstruction. Nine of the twelve crimes took place during the relevant period for the citizenship application. He received a sentence of 56 months.

The United States filed this action to denaturalize Salem based on his crimes, and later moved for summary judgment. The material facts are undisputed: Salem defrauded the government, and then lied about it. He defrauded the USDA, and then defrauded the INS. The motion is granted.

Background

The government supported its motion for summary judgment by filing a Rule 56.1 statement of material facts, complete with supporting evidence. Salem filed no response. Salem's failure to respond "results in deeming admitted the uncontroverted statements" in the government's Rule 56.1 submission. See Raymond v. Ameritech Corp. , 442 F.3d 600, 608 (7th Cir. 2006) ; Smith v. Lamz , 321 F.3d 680, 683 (7th Cir. 2003) ; see also L.R. 56.1(b)(3)(C) ("All material facts set forth in the statement required of the moving party will be deemed to be admitted unless controverted by the statement of the opposing party.").

Defendant Wail Salem was born in Jordan in 1965. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 2 (Dckt. No. 44); Application for Naturalization (Dckt. No. 42-6, at 2 of 5). He came to the United States on a student visa in January 1986. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 3. About three years later, he married a naturalized U.S. citizen and became a permanent resident. Id. at ¶ 4.

Salem owned several small neighborhood grocery stores in Chicago. Id. at ¶ 16. He participated in the food stamp program run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture ("USDA"). Id. The USDA entrusted Salem with authorization codes and "Food Stamp Redemption Certificates" so that he could sell food to the needy. Id.

Salem betrayed the government's trust. From April 1989 to June 1995, he stole money from the food stamp program. Id. at ¶ 11. He "obtained food stamp coupons through illicit means," and then "redeem[ed] the food stamp coupons at banks for U.S. currency." Id. at ¶ 16. He redeemed the coupons knowing that consumers hadn't used them to buy food. Id. at ¶ 17.

All told, Salem siphoned about $10 million from the food stamp program. Id. at ¶ 19. He covered his theft by stashing the funds in various bank accounts, including 14 accounts opened under the false name "Wael Talah." Id. at ¶¶ 19–20. He failed to pay taxes, too. Between January 1991 and June 1995, he failed to file tax returns with the IRS, hiding the money from the agency and preventing it from determining the amount and source of his income. Id. at ¶¶ 18, 21.

Meanwhile, Salem applied to become a citizen of the country that he was defrauding. In October 1992, Salem applied for naturalization by submitting an Application for Naturalization ("Form N-400") with the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS"). Id. at ¶ 25; Application for Naturalization (Dckt. No. 42-6, at 2 of 5).

The form posed a series of questions. One of the questions asked: "Have you ever: (a) knowingly committed any crime for which you have not been arrested?" See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 26 (Dckt. No. 44). There were two choices: "Yes" and "No."

In response, Salem checked a box and gave an unequivocal answer: "No." Id. at ¶ 27; see also Application for Naturalization (Dckt. No. 42-6, at 4 of 5).

The form also required Salem to "certify ... under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that this application, and the evidence submitted with it, is all true and correct." See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 28 (Dckt. No. 44). Salem signed his name below that certification, swearing under penalty of perjury that he was truthful. Id. at ¶ 29.

After submitting the form, Salem sat for an interview with the INS in May 1993. Id. at ¶ 30. Salem swore under oath that he would answer all of the questions truthfully. Id. at ¶ 31. The INS officer asked Salem if he had ever knowingly committed a crime for which he had not been arrested. Id. at ¶ 32. Once again, Salem answered "no." Id. at ¶ 33. At the end of his interview, he signed his Form N-400 again, verifying a second time that he was telling the truth. Id. at ¶ 34; Application for Naturalization (Dckt. No. 42-6, at 5 of 5).

The INS approved Salem's naturalization application in October 1994. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 37 (Dckt. No. 44). Two months later, he took the Oath of Allegiance to become a U.S. citizen. Id. at ¶¶ 5, 38.

Fraudulent schemes often unravel, and Salem's scam was no exception. He was arrested in December 1997. Id. at ¶ 12. In February 1998, a grand jury indicted him on seventeen criminal counts. Id. at ¶ 13. The charges included mail fraud, food stamp fraud, identity document fraud, and obstruction of the IRS. Id. ; see also Indictment (Dckt. No. 42-2).

Salem signed a plea agreement – with the assistance of counsel – before the end of the year. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶¶ 14, 22 (Dckt. No. 44); Plea Agreement (Dckt. No. 42-3). He agreed to plead guilty to twelve counts, including five counts of mail fraud (Counts 1–5), five counts of food stamp fraud (Counts 6, 9, 12, 16, & 17), one count of identity document fraud (Count 18), and one count of obstruction of the IRS (Count 24). See Plea Agreement, at 2. Nine of the twelve crimes took place before naturalization. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 15.

In the Plea Agreement, Salem agreed to "plead guilty because he is in fact guilty of the charges." See Plea Agreement, at ¶ 5 (Dckt. No. 42-3); see also Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 22 (Dckt. No. 44). He also agreed that no one had threatened him: "Defendant and his attorney acknowledge that no threats, promises, or representations have been made, nor agreements reached, other than those set forth in this Agreement, to cause defendant to plead guilty." See Plea Agreement, at ¶ 19. The Plea Agreement was "entirely voluntary." Id. at 1.

The Court accepted his guilty plea. See Plea Transcript (Dckt. No. 42-5). Before doing so, the Court asked Salem to confirm that no one had threatened him, and that no one had made any promises to him apart from the plea agreement. Id. at 18–19. Salem represented to the Court that his guilty plea was entirely voluntary, and that he was pleading guilty because he was in fact guilty. Id. at 19.

On March 5, 1999, Salem received a sentence of 56 months imprisonment for each count, with each sentence running concurrently. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 23 (Dckt. No. 44). The Court also ordered restitution totaling $9,845,000. Id. at ¶ 24; see also Judgment (Dckt. No. 42-4).

Salem never disclosed his criminal activities to the INS during the naturalization process. See Pl.’s Local Rule 56.1(a) Statement of Material Facts, at ¶ 35 (Dckt. No. 44). If the INS had known about his illegal conduct, the INS would have been required to deny his application. Id. at ¶ 36.

In 2019, the United States filed this action to revoke Salem's citizenship under 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a). See Cplt. (Dckt. No. 1). The statute provides that it "shall be the duty" of the United States Attorney to bring suit "for the purpose of revoking and setting aside the order admitting such person to citizenship and canceling the certificate of naturalization on the ground that such order and certificate of naturalization were illegally procured or were procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation." See 8 U.S.C. § 1451(a).

The complaint contains four counts, and each rests on a different statutory basis for revoking Salem's citizenship. Three of the four counts allege that Salem lacked good moral character within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f). Specifically, the government alleges that Salem committed a crime involving moral turpitude (Count I), committed unlawful acts that reflected adversely on his moral character (Count II), and gave false testimony under oath for the purpose of becoming a citizen (Count III). In Count IV, the United States alleges that Salem procured his citizenship by concealment of a material fact and by willful misrepresentation.

Salem answered the complaint in November 2019, and included a number of denials. See Answer (Dckt. No. 23). The government filed its motion for summary judgment on February 28, 2020. See Dckt. No. 40. But at that point, Salem went off the grid.

Salem's counsel lost contact with his client. He filed multiple motions to withdraw, claiming that Salem was AWOL and couldn't be found. See Dckt. Nos. 29, 36, 47, 53, 61. Two weeks before...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Allison v. Paratech, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 7 Octubre 2021
    ...we deem that statement to be undisputed. See Raymond v. Ameritech Corp., 442 F.3d 600, 608 (7th Cir. 2006); United States v. Salem, 496 F.Supp.3d 1167, 1170 (N.D. Ill. 2020). --------- ...
  • United States v. Milosevic
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 31 Marzo 2022
    ...had a ‘natural tendency to influence’ the naturalization decision, and that is all that is required."); United States v. Salem , 496 F. Supp. 3d 1167, 1180 (N.D. Ill. 2020) (" ‘Materiality’ means that something has ‘a natural tendency to influence’ a naturalization decision.") (quoting Kung......
  • United States v. Ahmed
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 22 Septiembre 2021
    ...Defendant has not collaterally challenged his criminal conviction- nor does he intend to [91 at 11 n.5]-and cannot do so here. See Salem, 496 F.Supp.3d at 1183 (“A denaturalization case is not the right time place to challenge a criminal conviction.” (citing Suarez, 664 F.3d at 663)). 3. St......
  • United States v. Yetisen
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Oregon
    • 22 Agosto 2022
    ... ... ineffective assistance of counsel, such a defense is ... unavailable. Defendant cannot challenge her criminal ... conviction in Bosnia and Herzegovina through a civil ... denaturalization proceeding in this Court. See United ... States v. Salem , 496 F.Supp.3d 1167, 1183 (N.D. Ill ... 2020) (“A denaturalization case is not the right time ... or place to challenge a criminal conviction.”). Thus, ... the Court grants the Government's motion as to ... Defendant's affirmative defense of ineffective assistance ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT