TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

In re Taula-Papa

Petition of Lagivalea Eseroma TAULA-PAPA To be Admitted a Citizen of the United States of America

In re Taula-Papa, 282 F. Supp. 156 (D. Haw. 1968)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court, D. Hawaii · Federal District Courts
Decided
March 11, 1968
Docket
No. Petition No. 31598
Judges
Tavares
Citations
282 F. Supp. 1561968 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8189

Opinion of the Court — Tavares

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF NATURALIZATION TAVARES, District Judge.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service, by John F. O’Shea, District Director, hereinafter referred to as the Movant, has moved this Court, under the provisions of Section 340 (j) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ( 8 U.S.C.A. § 1451 (j)), and under the provisions of Rule 60(b), Title 28, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to reopen its order and judgment .of naturalization of August 11, 1967, List No. 1932, insofar as it relates to the admission to United States citizenship of the above-named petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner, who is noted on page 1, line 15 of said list.

The petitioner herein failed to meet the six months State residence requirement, notwithstanding her eligibility for Section 325 benefits.

The petitioner, in the course of her naturalization proceedings, was well aware that on the day she filed her petition, she had not arrived in Hawaii on November 5, 1966 for the first time and therefore had not resided for six months in Hawaii. She knowingly and wilfully concealed this information for the purpose of facilitating her naturalization.

The information concealed by the petitioner was material to a determination of her qualifications for naturalization and induced the Immigration and Naturalization Service to recommend to this Court that her petition be granted, and induced the Court to grant her petition.

The petitioner has filed a written answer admitting the allegations in the Government’s motion.

It is, therefore, ordered that the movant’s motion to reopen this Court’s order and judgment, List No. 1932, insofar as it relates to the petitioner herein, be and the same is hereby granted.

Petitioner’s request that her petition be withdrawn is hereby granted.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1971: 11973: 11999: 119712026peak 1971 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Petition of Cardines366 F. Supp. 700 (D. Guam 1973)
  2. Gorbach v. Reno179 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 1999)
  3. Simons v. United States333 F. Supp. 855 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

Most recent

  1. Gorbach v. Reno179 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 1999)
  2. Petition of Cardines366 F. Supp. 700 (D. Guam 1973)
  3. Simons v. United States333 F. Supp. 855 (S.D.N.Y. 1971)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list