NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ________________ No. 17-3621 ________________ RAFAEL MARTINEZ, AKA Rafael Martinez Taveras, AKA Aramis Del Valle-Roldan, AKA Rafael Aroldo Guillen, AKA Ivan Rivera, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ________________ On Petition for Review of a Final Order of the United States Department of Justice Board of Immigration Appeals Immigration Judge: Honorable Walter Durling (Agency No. A041-743-338) ________________ Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on January 7, 2019 Before: AMBRO, SHWARTZ and FUENTES, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: January 18, 2019) ________________ OPINION* ________________ AMBRO, Circuit Judge Petitioner Rafael Martinez was born in the Dominican Republic in December 1970. He has lived with his biological uncle, Ricardo Taveras Pena, since the age of two. At that time Taveras Pena was a lawful permanent resident of the United States, but he became a naturalized citizen in 1977. Martinez continued to reside in the Dominican Republic, and Taveras Pena traveled back and forth between the two countries during this time. He formally adopted Martinez in the Dominican Republic in 1986, and the latter entered the United States as a lawful permanent resident in November 1988, one month shy of his 18th birthday. Then-current immigration law provided for the children of newly naturalized citizens to acquire derivative citizenship if certain conditions were met. See 8 U.S.C. § 1432 (repealed). First, the statute defined the kind of naturalization event that triggers derivative citizenship: “(1) “the naturalization of both parents; or (2) the naturalization of the surviving parent if one of the parents is deceased; or (3) the naturalization of the parent having legal custody of the child when there has been a legal separation of the parents or the naturalization of the mother if the child was born out of wedlock and the paternity of the child has not been established by legitimation.” Id. § 1432(a)(1)–(3) * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 (repealed). When one of these events occurred, if the child was under the age of 18 and either was residing in the United States as a lawful permanent resident at that time or subsequently entered the country as a lawful permanent resident prior to turning 18, the child would automatically become a citizen. Id. § 1432(a)(4)–(5). Subsection (b) of the law provided that this would only apply to an adopted child if, at the time of the naturalization event, the child was residing in the United States as a lawful permanent resident in the custody of the adoptive parent(s). This meant that Martinez did not qualify for derivative citizenship because, in 1977 when Taveras Pena was naturalized, he did not yet reside in the United States. Had Martinez been Taveras Pena’s biological child, he would have acquired derivative citizenship on entering the country as a lawful permanent resident in November 1988 because he was not yet 18 years old. Section 1432 was repealed by the ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals