Case Explained: ZAJRADHARA V. OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-05 The Ninth Circuit denied Zaji O. Zajradhara’s petition for review of an Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO) order dismissing his citizenship-status discrimination claim under 8 U.S.C. § 1324b. The court held that the ALJ properly dismissed the claim as a matter of law because the employer, Taga, Inc., employed fewer than three people at all relevant times, falling outside the statutory coverage threshold of § 1324b(a)(2)(A). Reviewing legal conclusions de novo and factual findings for substantial evidence, the court found that Taga submitted undisputed affidavits establishing it had no more than two employees, and Zajradhara failed to contest this evidence or provide genuine dispute through discovery. The court further affirmed the ALJ’s decisions on several procedural grounds: (1) vacating a default judgment against Taga was not an abuse of discretion because Taga’s conduct was not culpable and it had a meritorious defense; (2) declining to disqualify or sanction Taga’s counsel was proper as no material adversity between clients was shown; (3) any error in declining judicial notice regarding Taga’s affiliated entities was harmless as it did not affect the numerosity threshold; (4) visa-fraud allegations provided no basis for relief under § 1324b, and no private right of action exists for alleged violations of § 1324c; and (5) constitutional claims alleging Fifth and Sixth Amendment due process violations and Equal Protection discrimination were without merit because the ALJ provided ample opportunity for discovery, the Sixth Amendment does not apply to civil proceedings, and Zajradhara failed to identify a similarly situated class treated disparately. The practical consequence is that the OCAHO’s dismissal of the discrimination claim stands, and the petition for review is denied. All associated motions to supplement the record or reinstate default orders were also denied. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.