Case Summary: TREEZ, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al | Cannabis Law Report | Where to buy Skittles Moonrock online

Learn where to buy marijuana online. TOP QUALITY GRADE A++

Cannabyss Inc. is the best place online to buy top quality weed, cannabis, vape, marijuana and CBD products. Get your borderless orders delivered at the pickup spot with ease. Top Grade products for client satisfaction.

👉 Click here to Visit our shop! 🛒

Written with input from Perplexity

In a significant ruling, Chief U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California granted a favorable judgment to Treez, Inc. in its lawsuit against the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) regarding the denial of an amended H-1B visa petition

.The case centered around Ameya Vinayak Pethe, a software developer from India employed by Treez, a company providing software services to state-legal cannabis businesses. In January 2022, USCIS initially approved Pethe’s H-1B visa petition. However, when Treez filed an amended petition to change Pethe’s work location from Missouri to Pennsylvania, USCIS denied it, citing concerns that Pethe’s work might “aid and abet” activities violating the Controlled Substances Act (CSA)

Key Points of the Judgment

1. Rejection of USCIS’s Determination: Judge Seeborg rejected USCIS’s conclusion that Pethe was aiding and abetting activities violating the CSA. He stated that Pethe’s job responsibilities as a software engineer were too far removed from any third-party conduct violating the CSA to warrant such a conclusion
2. Arbitrary and Capricious Decision: The court found USCIS’s denial of the amended petition to be arbitrary and capricious. Judge Seeborg noted that USCIS had previously approved numerous similar petitions for Treez and other companies serving the cannabis industry
3. Interpretation of “Aiding and Abetting”: The judge emphasized that general knowledge or services supporting an illicit actor are insufficient to constitute aiding and abetting, which requires secondary liability for specific wrongful acts
4. No Notice and Comment Requirement: While the court concluded that USCIS’s decision was arbitrary, it did not find that the agency’s determination to evaluate legal issues in H-1B applications was subject to notice and comment requirements
5. Contempt and Potential Sanctions: The court held USCIS agency defendants in contempt for violating court orders during litigation and referred the case to a magistrate judge to consider potential sanctions

Background and Context

Treez filed the lawsuit in November 2022 after USCIS denied the amended H-1B petition for Pethe. The company argued that USCIS had arbitrarily reversed its previous practices, as it had approved similar petitions for Treez and other companies in the past

The case highlighted broader implications for businesses providing services to the state-legal cannabis industry. Treez’s legal team argued that the government’s position could potentially affect operations of all legal businesses offering services to customers in the state-legal cannabis sector, from telecommunications providers to ATM companies

.

Legal Arguments and Proceedings

Treez’s Motion for Summary Judgment: In September 2024, Treez filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that USCIS had exceeded its statutory jurisdiction, promulgated a new rule without required procedures, and arbitrarily denied the amended H-1B petition

Government’s Defense: The U.S. government urged the court to dismiss Treez’s claims, defending its decision to deny the visa relocation request

Timing Considerations: Treez requested the court to grant summary judgment before the underlying petition for Pethe’s visa expires on January 12, 2025

.

Implications of the Ruling

1. Impact on Cannabis-Related Businesses: The judgment sends a clear message that companies providing legitimate services to state-legal cannabis businesses deserve fair treatment and should not be unfairly targeted or discriminated against
2. H-1B Visa Considerations: The case highlights the complexities surrounding H-1B visas for employees in industries that intersect with federally controlled substances, despite state-level legalization
3. Administrative Law Precedent: The ruling underscores the importance of consistent application of rules and regulations by federal agencies, particularly in evolving legal landscapes like the cannabis industry

Conclusion

Judge Seeborg’s ruling in favor of Treez marks a significant development in the intersection of immigration law, administrative procedures, and the evolving legal status of the cannabis industry. By rejecting USCIS’s determination and finding their decision arbitrary and capricious, the court has set a precedent that could influence future cases involving similar issues. The judgment emphasizes the need for federal agencies to apply consistent standards and avoid arbitrary decision-making, particularly in industries with complex legal statuses across state and federal levels.This case also highlights the ongoing challenges faced by businesses operating in the state-legal cannabis industry when dealing with federal regulations and agencies. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, such rulings may play a crucial role in shaping policies and practices at the federal level regarding businesses and individuals associated with the cannabis industry.

Treez_SJ_Order.675308c5b454d