Court Rejects Indian Students’ Class-Action Bid for Tuition Refunds in University of Farmington Case

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims denied five Indian students’ bid to pursue tuition refunds from the government as a class action. The ruling leaves their individual claims alive.

The proposed class covered people who enrolled between 2015 and 2019 and paid tuition at least once after receiving an admission offer and invoice. Judge Armando O. Bonilla’s order was made public November 4, 2026.

The decision does not resolve whether any of the five students can recover tuition. Each must prove an individual claim.

The court said each student’s knowledge must be examined separately

The central question is what each student understood when applying, enrolling and paying: whether they believed they were pursuing an education, or knew the school was part of a plan to help foreign nationals maintain student-visa status.

The government argued undercover agents told students that the university would not hold actual classes. It also submitted recordings that reportedly suggest four plaintiffs may have been involved. Those claims remain part of the disputed evidence, not a finding that every plaintiff knowingly participated.

The named plaintiffs are Ravi Teja Tiyyagura, Swetha Bachu, Rajesh Ghourvani, Akhil Mohan and Sneha Parthasarathy. The court concluded that deciding their knowledge and circumstances would require individual inquiries. Its seven requirements for class certification are stricter than those used in federal district courts.

Bonilla rejected treating students with potentially different knowledge as one group. He wrote:

Judge Bonilla said he “struggles to imagine a case more ill-suited for class certification,” and that “[i]t would unjustly aid the guilty and prejudice the innocent to bind them into a single class.”

The dispute also raises whether an agreement connected to illegal activity can support a tuition-refund claim. The court’s approach leaves that question tied to what each student knew and did.

The undercover school offered no actual classes, the government argued

Homeland Security Investigations established the University of Farmington in Michigan as an undercover operation called Operation Paper Chase. The government’s position was that agents made clear the school would not provide classes.

The case concerns tuition students seek back from the government, not a refund award already made. The order’s account puts the operation’s tuition collections at more than $6.5 million. That total is not the amount awarded to the plaintiffs or a finding that any one student is owed a particular sum.

The 2024 appeal sent the knowledge question back to the trial court

The Federal Circuit revived the case in 2024 after a jurisdictional dismissal. It noted that contracts involving illegal activity cannot be enforced, while leaving the question of each student’s knowledge for the Court of Federal Claims.

Students who knowingly joined a “pay-to-stay” arrangement would not have a tuition-refund claim on that basis. The appeals ruling did not establish that the five plaintiffs, or other former students, were entitled to money.

The five plaintiffs must prove their own claims at trial

The class-certification denial does not end the lawsuit. The court said the five named plaintiffs must establish that they intended to obtain a genuine education and were not knowingly participating in the immigration-status arrangement.

Their circumstances would need individual consideration; the decision creates no class-wide refund.

Former students can gather their admission offers, invoices, payment records and communications with the university, then review their individual circumstances with counsel. The record in each case is central.

This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.