In re Sultan, 23532.
| Decision Date | 15 December 1931 |
| Docket Number | No. 23532.,23532. |
| Citation | 54 F.2d 711 |
| Parties | In re SULTAN. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
James C. Espey, of San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.
Paul Armstrong, Dist. Director of Navigation and C. A. Ball, Asst. Dist. Director of Navigation, both of San Francisco, Cal., for the United States.
Applicant, born in Sweden, lived in Canada, and was naturalized as a subject of George V, King of Great Britain. He entered the United States in 1923, and about a year later made a declaration of intention to become a citizen, renouncing all allegiance to Gustavus V, King of Sweden. Later he made and filed his petition for naturalization, in which he renounced all allegiance to King George V. Discovering the contradiction as to renunciation between the declaration and the petition, the government moves to dismiss the petition "for the reason that it is predicated upon an invalid declaration of intention, bearing incorrect renunciation of allegiance."
In his answer to the motion, applicant says that "through inadvertence or advice from one of the clerks of the Naturalization Bureau, petitioner renounced allegiance to Gustavus V, King of Sweden, when as a matter of fact he was a subject of Great Britain at the time."
Believing that the clerk might have made an error in inserting in the declaration the name of the King of Sweden instead of the King of Great Britain, to whom applicant owed allegiance, I have given the case considerable thought, with the hope that I might be able to decide in applicant's favor. But I find that the contention of the government is correct. It is settled that a declaration of intention containing an incorrect renunciation of allegiance is insufficient to support a petition for citizenship, and that such declaration of intention cannot be amended. See United States v. Vogel (C. C. A.) 262 F. 262; In re Rothkowitz (D. C.) 2 F.(2d) 634; In re Lewkowicz (D. C.) 169 F. 927; In re Stack (D. C.) 200 F. 330; In re Friedl (D. C.) 202 F. 300; In re Poirot (D. C.) 168 F. 456; In re Lange (D. C.) 197 F. 769.
The motion to dismiss will be granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brassert v. Biddle, 225.
...sovereign. United States v. Ness, 245 U.S. 319, 38 S.Ct. 118, 62 L.Ed. 321; United States v. Vogel, 2 Cir., 262 F. 262; In re Sultan, D. C. N. D. Cal., 54 F.2d 711; In re Rothkowitz, D. C. Or., 2 F.2d 634; Ex parte Eberhardt, D. C. E. D. Mo., 270 F. 334. Further, and more to the point for o......