Materials supporting events described
in the Book "Under Red Notice.

As seen in the picture, from my arrival as a tourist in the United States on November 15, 2015, I was permitted to remain in the U.S. until May 14, 2016. In other words, for six months I was in lawful tourist status, which is known under U.S. law as nonimmigrant status. Being in lawful status in the United States gives you the opportunity to change it lawfully to immigration status — usually by filing the appropriate immigration application with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a subdivision of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

I filed an asylum application (Form I-589) on January 25, 2016 — in other words, four months before my lawful status expired. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services accepted my application and mailed me an Acknowledgment of Receipt, by which they permitted me to remain in the United States until my asylum application would be decided by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (see document below).

Long story short - throughout all further proceedings over the years, the U.S. government accused me of remaining in the U.S. beyond May 14, 2016 without permission, as if they never issued a second permission tied to my asylum application. That was a complete fabrication of an immigration violation, and I still cannot fathom why they so eagerly tried—and are trying—to deport me to Russians on a fabricated, false charge I never committed in the United States as explained in detail below.

After receiving permission to remain in the United States based on my asylum application, I was permitted by the U.S. government to remain in the United States with only one condition — until my asylum application is decided. As seen in the picture, on May 14, 2016, my nonimmigrant status, based on my legal arrival in the United States, expired, and with it my initial permission based on my tourist status expired as well. However, the U.S. government's permission granted to me based on my asylum status continued to be valid because the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had not yet decided my asylum application and never revoked that permission. Therefore, I remained in the United States as an asylum seeker lawfully and with the U.S. government's full acknowledgment and explicit permission.

However, 2.5 years later I was arrested by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security at the office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, after I was invited to that office for an asylum interview. The only official reason for the arrest and the official charge brought against me was that I had remained in the United States without permission. See below the Notice to Appear — the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's official charging document.

Here is the corrected version:

So, as you can easily grasp from these documents, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security permitted me to remain in the United States at the beginning, but then arrested me for remaining in the United States based on their own permission. However, you may fairly say: 'Wait a minute, Gregory — your permission based on your asylum claim contained one condition: until your asylum application is decided. So we cannot tell from these documents whether your asylum claim had or had not been decided yet.' And you are right — that is a fair point.

However, as I wrote in my book, only six months after my arrest I received a DHS officer's narrative clearly confirming that they knew my asylum application was still pending and therefore I had not committed the violation they ultimately fabricated against me and entered into the official document above. The DHS officer's narrative, which I am attaching below, also indicated that the only reason for my arrest was a Russian INTERPOL Red Notice — a basis upon which U.S. DHS had no authority to make an arrest. That is why the DHS officers had to fabricate a violation to justify the arrest they had already decided to make — in other words, they created a false administrative charge to pretend that I had committed it, while in reality they needed a pretext to comply with a Russian demand made through INTERPOL: to arrest me and then deport me to a corrupt Russian investigator.

Thus, as the official explanations of the U.S. officers revealed that the real reason of the arrest was the Interpol Red Notice exclusively. No other concerns the immigration officers’ narrative above indicates.

However, the Department of Justice (DOJ), presenting the supreme power over the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. Federal Agencies’ hierarchic structure for executive power distribution gives a clear public notice in its Manual (DOJ Manual) prohibiting arrest based on INTERPOL Red Notice. See the excerpt from DOJ Manual:

"In the United States, national law prohibits the arrest of the subject of a Red Notice issued by another INTERPOL member country, based upon the notice alone. If the subject for a Red Notice is found within the United States, the Criminal Division will make a determination if a valid extradition treaty exists between the United States and the requesting country for the specified crime or crimes." You can see it here

Thus, the DOJ clearly proclaims that the national U.S. law prohibits an arrest of the person based on the Red Notice alone no exception is mentioned. Moreover, it is expounded that even if any valid extradition treaty exists between the United States and requesting country (that is not) it is the question of the Criminal Division but not the Civil Immigration matters and therefore, outside the ICE officers’ power.

Noteworthy, the DOJ’s subdivision National Central Bureau of INTERPOL (NCB) provides less formal but still public notice interpreting the value of the Red Notice in the United States by providing on its website the public written answer to the question “Can a person be arrested based on Interpol Red Notice?”

"Once published by INTERPOL, each member country determines what effect to give a Notice within its jurisdiction according to its national law and practice. The United States does not consider a Red Notice alone to be a sufficient basis for the arrest of a subject because it does not meet the requirements for arrest under the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. Instead, the United States treats a foreign-issued Red Notice only as a formalized request by the issuing law enforcement authority to “be on the look-out” for the fugitive in question, and to advise if they are located." You can see it here.

The, very authorities for conducting arrest by the immigration officers are very limited under 8 C.F.R. § 287.8(c)(2)(i):

"An arrest shall be made only when the designated immigration officer has reason to believe that the person to be arrested has committed an offense against the United States or is an alien illegally in the United States."

Thus, by clear language of the Code of Federal Regulations, the U.S. Immigration Officers (ICE) have authority to conduct an arrest only if they have reason to believe in two situations:

(1) the person to be arrested committed an offense against the United States.

(2) if an alien illegally in the United States.

Given all the facts mentioned above, the INTERPOL Red Notice issued on the allegations of Russian authorities neither constitutes any valid reason to believe that I committed an offense against the United States, nor does it confirm or deny whether I was illegally in the United States. Therefore, the INTERPOL Red Notice falls outside the scope of the immigration officers' authority to conduct an arrest under U.S. law.

However, as stated by the immigration officers in their own narrative, they decided to arrest me solely based on a Russian request made through an INTERPOL Red Notice, by that, disregarding the Department of Justice’s clear public prohibition, violating the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, violating the federal statute enacted by the U. S. Congress and outlining the power to conduct the arrest of aliens, and exceeding the authority granted to them by federal regulations issued by the Attorney General—all in order to obey the Russian’s request.

However, it was not the only violations the Immigration officers committed during the arrest.

Thus, while the reason of the initial decision to approach and take me in custody was the INTERPOL Red Notice, the further events described in the narrative above exposed that during the conducted arrest immigration officers said nothing about the INTERPOL Red Notice but changed their reason for arrest as following:

"On September 12, 2018 the Los Angeles FAR team consisting of Officer's Ray, Jackson and Serna went to 1585 S Manchester Ave in the City of Anaheim, CA, where Grigorii DURALEV A208 814 399 was scheduled for a CIS interview related to his application for asylum. At approximately 1330 a male was seen entering the office building and based on available photos and physical description, the individual was believed to be the target DURALEV.

After DURALEV entered the building and was checked in with security, he was escorted alone to an interview room where ERO officers Ray and Lara positively identified DURALEV and questioned him concerning his immigration status in the United States. DURALEV stated that he was a citizen of Russia and he had applied for asylum. After establishing alienage officers Ray and LARA explained that he was being taken into custody and would be transported to the Los Angeles Federal Building for processing. Following this, DURALEV was placed into handcuffs and escorted from the building." (See narrative attached above)

As it appears from the ICE officers’ own narrative, they arrested me solely based on established alienage, violating the authority granted to them by Congress under 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2) and by the Attorney General through 8 C.F.R. § 287.8(c)(2)(i) – “An arrest shall be made only when the designated immigration officer has reason to believe that the person to be arrested has committed an offense against the United States or is an alien illegally in the United States.”

There are no legal grounds for arresting individuals in the United States solely on the basis of alienage (except across the U.S. border). If such authority existed inside the country, it would denote that all foreign people including tourists, having come to the United States, must be arrested based solely on their alienage that would be an absurd of the most basic sort and turn the United States into North Korea. However, the United States Immigration officers signed the official federal narrative that the second reason for arrest of me, to which they changed the initial one relating to INTERPOL, was exactly “after establishing alienage.” That is actually a threat to all international community having their citizens in the United States under any of the reason, since the United States immigration officers can arrest them only after establishing their alienage.

Moreover, again in accordance with the officers’ own narrative:

Meanwhile, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) §287(a) that is equivalent to federal statute 8 U.S. Code 1357(a) limits the power of Immigration Officers to interrogate an alien without a warrant solely to matters concerning "his right to be or to remain in the United States." This statutory language clearly limits the scope of questioning and does not permit officers to interrogate aliens about unrelated issues including “immigration status”. Similar restrictions are established under federal regulations, specifically 8 C.F.R. §287.5(a)(1). There is no provision in the federal regulations that permits Immigration Officers to question aliens about their “immigration status” at least for enforcement purposes.

Despite these clear legal limitations, ICE Officers Serna, Ray, and Lara, as stated in their signed narrative, violated federal legislature by questioning me about his “immigration status”, in violation of their statutory duty.

The law reasonably constrained the immigration officer with the specific question because the asylum seekers, while their application is pending, does not have any lawful status yet in the United States, but they are permitted and thus, have right to remain in the United States until the decision over their application. The officer knew that or should have known their limitations but neglected or intentionally confused me by jumping from one illegal question to another.

So, the immigration officers decided initially to approach and arrest me on the basis of INTERPOL Red Notice that was outside of their authority. Then, after they approached me, they arrested me on the basis of the established alienage that was also outside of their authority prescribed by the federal legislation. Eventually, after I was transported to the federal building, they officially charged me with administrative violation of remaining in the United States longer than permitted even though they permitted me to remain in the United States and its permission was still valid because my asylum application has never been decided by the USCIS.

Later, as I wrote in my book, the Immigration Judge Kevin W Riley, corrupted by his confidence that he is above the law, helped the Immigration officer to sustain their illegal arrest and ordered me to deport to the Russian Federation based on the violation that I had never committed. You may see a full true and correct transcript of the Master hearing in the Immigration Court before the judge Kevin W. Riley here at the end of my article about this judge in my blog.

Materials supporting events described in the Book "Under Red Notice.

Materials supporting events described
in the Book "Under Red Notice.