Collins v. USCIS, No. 13-55290 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, a naturalized citizen from Nigeria, appealed the district court's denial of his request to modify his birth date. There is no official record of petitioner's birth. Petitioner listed the birth date that his mother recalled when he was naturalized in 1987. Petitioner later discovered, upon finding a handwritten record of family birth dates in his father's Bible, that he had been born four years earlier. At issue is whether the federal courts have jurisdiction to modify naturalization certificates issued by the courts prior to October 1, 1991. The court concluded that Congress preserved federal subject matter jurisdiction over such certificates through the uncodified savings clause of the Immigration Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-649 408, 104 Stat. 4978, 5047, and that the federal courts have jurisdiction to consider motions to amend such certificates in accordance with former 8 U.S.C. 1451(i). The court emphasized the distinction between two categories of certificates: those issued by courts prior to 1991 and those issued by the Attorney General after the Immigration Act of 1990 went into effect on October 1,1991. Accordingly, the court reversed the district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and remanded.
Court Description: Immigration. The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of Olufemi Collins’s petition to require the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service to amend his date of birth on his court-issued naturalization certificate. The panel held that the federal courts have jurisdiction to modify naturalization certificates issued by the courts before the Immigration Act of 1990 went into effect on October 1, 1991. The panel concluded that Congress preserved federal subject matter jurisdiction over such naturalization certificates through the uncodified savings clause of the Immigration Act of 1990, and that the federal courts have jurisdiction to consider motions to amend them pursuant to former 8 U.S.C. § 1451(i) (1988). The panel noted the distinction between two categories of certificates: those issued by courts prior to 1991 and those issued by the Attorney General after the Immigration Act of 1990 took effect. The panel wrote that its opinion in this case addressed the former category, and that its separate opinion filed concurrently in Teng v. District Director, 14-55558, __F.3d__ (9th Cir. 2016), addressed the latter. COLLINS V. USCIS 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.