8 C.F.R. § 340.1
[Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1997–2016 · leading case: Gorbach v. Reno, 179 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 1999).
Gorbach v. Reno, 179 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 1999). “1 The Attorney General delegated her power to the Immigration & Naturalization Service (INS), which in turn promulgated a regulation, 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 , providing for administrative reopening and revocation of naturalization orders where there is evidence that the order of…”
Gorbach v. Reno, 219 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2000). “8 C.F.R. § 340.1 . . 8 U.S.C. § 1103 . . 8 U.”
United States v. Clarke, 628 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009). “§ 1451 and 8 C.F.R. §§ 340.1 and 340.2, this Court is without authority to make a determination as to the legitimacy of Maharaj’s citizenship.”
United States v. Clarke, 767 F. Supp. 2d 12 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 (g)(4). 26 The Court rejected the conclusory assertion that Maharaj’s citizenship could be considered void without a final order issued pursuant to § 1451 because that premise entirely failed to reckon with a key aspect of the § 1451 regime established by…”
Gorbach v. Reno, 181 F.R.D. 642 (W.D. Wash. 1998). “In 1996 the INS promulgated 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 , which authorizes the INS to initiate and conduct administrative denaturalization proceedings.”
United States v. Rebelo, 358 F. Supp. 2d 400 (D.N.J. 2005). “Thus, pursuant to Section 340(h) of the INA, as well as 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 , the INS sought to revoke Rebelo’s naturalization on two grounds.”
Alexander v. Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, 13 Am. Tribal Law 353 (2016). “Since we are reviewing that decision de novo, we “consid-ere 1 the matter anew as if no decision previously has been rendered.”
United States v. Straker (D.D.C. 2009). “See 8 C.F.R. §§ 340.1 and 340.2. Demerieux has submitted the affidavits of Reita Pendry and George Steel to both the U.”
United States v. Fabuluje (5th Cir. 2000). “Fabuluje also argues that even assuming that joinder was proper, his trial was “procedurally defaulted” because he should have been given a revocation hearing pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 prior to criminal prosecution.”
United States v. Fabuluje (5th Cir. 2000). “Fabuluje also argues that even assuming that joinder was proper, his trial was “procedurally defaulted” because he should have been given a revocation hearing pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 prior to criminal prosecution.”
Valerio v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 86 F. Supp. 2d 1009 (D. Haw. 1999). “See 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 (b)(1). Any administrative proceeding to denaturalize Mrs.”
Revocation of Citizenship (OLC 1997). “at 55,553-54 (to be codified at 8 C.F.R. § 340.1 (a)). Notice of intent to reopen naturalization proceedings “ must be served no later than 2 years after the effective date of the order admitting a person to citizenship,” id.”
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.