(a) An individual is found to be eligible if such an individual:
(1) Is of Japanese ancestry; and
(2) Was living on the date of enactment of the Act, August 10, 1988; and
(3) During the evacuation, relocation, and internment period was—
(i) A United States citizen; or
(ii) A permanent resident alien who was lawfully admitted into the United States; or
(iii) An alien, who after the evacuation, relocation and internment period, was permitted by applicable statutes to obtain the status of permanent resident alien extending to the internment period; and
(4) Was confined, held in custody, relocated, or otherwise deprived of liberty or property as a result of—
(i) Executive Order 9066, dated February 19, 1942;
(ii) The Act entitled “An Act to provide a penalty for violation of restrictions or orders with respect to persons entering, remaining, leaving, or committing any act in military areas or zones,” approved March 21, 1942; or
(iii) Any other Executive order, Presidential proclamation, law of the United States, directive of the Armed Forces of the United States, or other action taken by or on behalf of the United States or its agents, representatives, officers, or employees, respecting the evacuation, relocation, or internment of individuals solely on the basis of Japanese ancestry.
(b) The following individuals are deemed to have suffered a loss within the meaning of paragraph (a)(4) of this section:
(1) Individuals who were interned under the supervision of the wartime Relocation Authority, the Department of Justice or the United States Army; or
(2) Individuals enrolled on the records of the United States Government during the period beginning on December 7, 1941, and ending June 30, 1946, as being in a prohibited military zone, including those individuals who, during the voluntary phase of the government's evacuation program between the issuance of Public Proclamation No. l on March 2, 1942, and the enforcement of Public Proclamation No. 4 on March 29, 1942, filed a “Change of Residence” card with the Wartime Civil Control Administration; or
(3) Individuals ordered by the Navy to leave Bainbridge Island, off the coast of the State of Washington, or Terminal Island, near San Pedro, California; or
(4) Individuals who were members of the Armed Forces of the United States at the time of the evacuation and internment period and whose domicile was in a prohibited zone and as a result of the government action lost property; or
(5) Individuals who were members of the Armed Forces of the United States at the time of the evacuation and internment period and were prohibited by government regulations from visiting their interned families or forced to submit to undue restrictions amounting to a deprivation of liberty prior to visiting their families; or
(6) Individuals who, after March 29, 1942, evacuated and relocated from the West Coast as a result of government action, including those who obtained written permission to travel to a destination outside of the unauthorized areas from the Western Defense Command and the Fourth Army; or
(7) Individuals born in assembly centers, relocation centers or internment camps to parents of Japanese ancestry who had been evacuated, relocated or interned pursuant to paragraph (a)(4) of this section, including children born in the United States to parents of Japanese ancestry who were relocated to the United States from other countries in the Americas during the internment period; or
(8) Individuals who, prior to or at the time of evacuation, relocation or internment period, were in institutions, such as a hospital, pursuant to acts described in paragraph (a)(4) and, were placed under the custody of the Wartime Relocation Authority and confined within the grounds of the institution and not permitted to return to their homes or to go anywhere else.
(9) Individuals born on or before January 20, 1945, to a parent or parents who had been evacuated, relocated, or interned from his or her original place of residence in the prohibited military zones on the West Coast, on or after March 2, 1942, pursuant to paragraph (a)(4) of this section, and who were excluded by Executive Order 9066 or military proclamations issued under its authority, from their parent's or parents' original place of residence in the prohibited military zones on the West Coast. This also includes those individuals who were born to a parent or parents who had “voluntarily” evacuated from his or her original place of residence in the prohibited military zones on the West Coast, on or after March 2, 1942, pursuant to paragraph (b)(3) of this section, and who were excluded by Executive Order 9066 or military proclamations issued under its authority, from their parent's or parents' original place of residence in the prohibited military zones on the West Coast.
(c) Paragraph (b) of this section is not an exhaustive list of individuals who are deemed eligible for compensation; there may be other individuals determined to be eligible under the Act on a case-by-case basis by the Redress Administrator.
[Order No. 1359-89, 54 FR 34161, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Order No. 2077-97, 62 FR 19934, Apr. 24, 1997]
Notes of Decisions
Murakami v. United States, 398 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
· cites it 5× “The Justice Department then amended its regulations to add 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(9), explicitly stating that individuals born on or before January 20, 1945 to “parents who had been evacuated, relocated, or interned” from their original place of residence were eligible for relief…”
Douglas L. Ishida v. United States, 59 F.3d 1224 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
· cites it 6× “§ 1989b-7(2)(B)(ii) (1988); 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(2) (1994). In 1992, however, the ORA denied Ishida’s claim for compensation under the Act, concluding that he was not eligible because his “losses were not the result of government action as defined in the Act and the implementing…”
Carol Judy Higashi v. United States, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fed. Circuit, 225 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
· cites it 6× “eligible individuals” persons born after their family suffered relocation, extending eligibility to: ^Individuals born on or before January 20, 1945, to a parent or parents who had been evacuated, relocated, or interned from his or her original place of residence in the…”
Ishida v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 280 (Fed. Cl. 1994).
· cites it 3× “In 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 eligibility determinations are set forth as: (a) An individual is found to be eligible if such an individual: (1) Is of Japanese ancestry; and (2) Was living on the date of enactment of the Act, August 10, 1988; and (3) During the evacuation, relocation, and…”
Odow v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 425 (Fed. Cl. 2001).
· cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b) (2000). The categories include “[ijndividuals who were members of the Armed Forces of the United States at the time of the evacuation and internment period and were prohibited by government regulations from visiting their interned fami *429 lies or forced…”
Motoyoshi v. United States, 33 Fed. Cl. 45 (Fed. Cl. 1995).
· cites it 5× “The regulations in 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b) provide examples of specific inclusions 3 and exclusions.”
Murakami v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 232 (Fed. Cl. 2002).
· cites it 3× “” 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b) (2000). The regulation also has a catch all provision which provides that the previously-identified categories do “not [constitute] an exhaustive list of individuals who are deemed eligible for compensation; there may be other individuals determined to be…”
Murakami v. United States, 58 Fed. Cl. 347 (Fed. Cl. 2003).
· cites it 4× “The court held that in examining this claim, the ORA erroneously had limited its analysis to the so-called Ishi-da provision of the regulations interpreting the Act, 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(9), which affirmatively provides that individuals born on or before January 20, 1945, to…”
Song v. United States, 43 Fed. Cl. 621 (Fed. Cl. 1999).
· cites it 3× “The ORA regulations were implemented at 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(9) and issued together with the preamble language, quoted above, in the Federal Register.”
Higashi v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 238 (Fed. Cl. 1999).
· cites it 9× “The Federal Circuit found that the DOJ’s regulations implementing the Act were broader than the ORA’s policy, stating: *244 Under 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 , the DOJ deems eligible several categories of individuals who were not “confined, held in custody, [or] relocated.”
Obadele v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 432 (Fed. Cl. 2002).
“28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (Eligibility Determinations) The Act was subsequently amended as follows to provide for judicial review exclusively in this Court: A claimant may seek judicial review of a denial of compensation under this section solely in the United States Claims Court [United…”
Consolo v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 447 (Fed. Cl. 1994).
· cites it 2× “…or forced to submit to undue restrictions amounting to a deprivation of liberty prior to visiting their families. 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(4) and (5).”
— 28 C.F.R. § 74.3(b)(7) — 3 cases
Douglas L. Ishida v. United States, 59 F.3d 1224 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
“§ 1989b-7(2)(B)(ii) (1988); 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(2) (1994). In 1992, however, the ORA denied Ishida’s claim for compensation under the Act, concluding that he was not eligible because his “losses were not the result of government action as defined in the Act and the implementing…”
Motoyoshi v. United States, 33 Fed. Cl. 45 (Fed. Cl. 1995).
“The regulations in 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b) provide examples of specific inclusions 3 and exclusions.”
Consolo v. United States, 31 Fed. Cl. 447 (Fed. Cl. 1994).
“…or forced to submit to undue restrictions amounting to a deprivation of liberty prior to visiting their families. 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 (b)(4) and (5).”
— 28 C.F.R. § 74.3(b)(9) — 1 case
Higashi v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 238 (Fed. Cl. 1999).
“The Federal Circuit found that the DOJ’s regulations implementing the Act were broader than the ORA’s policy, stating: *244 Under 28 C.F.R. § 74.3 , the DOJ deems eligible several categories of individuals who were not “confined, held in custody, [or] relocated.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.