The latest ruling in a lawsuit seeking the release of Prince Harry's US visa records has been sealed from public view but decision could yet be appealed.
The case, brought by the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington DC, challenges the US government to disclose its dossier on the Duke of Sussex under freedom of information laws.
The think tank questioned how Prince Harry was able to move to the United States after admitting to drug use in his memoir, "Spare".
Court records show that on Monday, 9 September, two sealed orders and a sealed "memorandum opinion" were filed, effectively closing the case.
The latest ruling in a lawsuit seeking the release of Prince Harry's US visa records has been sealed from public view but decision could yet be appealed.
PA
This development suggests that the Duke's visa paperwork will likely remain private.
Sealed rulings are inaccessible to the public but may be unsealed at a later date. The Heritage Foundation could still appeal the decision.
In "Spare", Prince Harry admitted to taking drugs including marijuana, cocaine and psychedelic mushrooms.
Visa applicants are legally required to declare drug use. Failure to do so can lead to deportation.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) argued that visa records are "personal information exempt from disclosure".
However, the Heritage Foundation contended that the Duke waived his privacy rights by "selling every aspect of his private life".
However, the Heritage Foundation contended that the Duke waived his privacy rights by "selling every aspect of his private life".
PA
The think tank even suggested Harry had "bragged" about drug use to boost book sales.
The DHS insisted that confessions made in a book "could not be considered 'proof' of his behaviour". John Bardo, a DHS lawyer, told the judge in February, "the book isn't sworn testimony or proof" that the Duke took drugs.
"Saying something in a book doesn't necessarily make it true," he added.
Nile Gardiner, director of the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, called this a "ridiculous argument".
The case has taken on political dimensions. Jane Hartley, the American ambassador to London, stated that the Duke would not be deported while Joe Biden was president.
LATEST ROYAL NEWS:
Donald Trump, meanwhile, refused to rule out deporting Prince Harry if he became president.
PA
Donald Trump, meanwhile, refused to rule out deporting Prince Harry if he became president.
The Heritage Foundation remains committed to pursuing the case. Samuel Dewey, a lawyer for the think tank, told The Telegraph: "We look forward to seeing the judge's decision. Plaintiffs do not have access to the order. This is part of the usual progress of an unusual case."
Kyle Brosnan, chief counsel for the Oversight Project, added: "We sued to get answers to a simple question of whether the government gave Prince Harry preferential treatment when he entered the country."
The Duke's office has not publicly commented on the case.
When the Sussexes moved to the US, a spokesman for Prince Harry insisted that in applying for a visa, he would "follow the same legal requirements as everyone else".
