Petition of Caputo, 492305.
Decision Date | 18 February 1954 |
Docket Number | No. 492305.,492305. |
Citation | 118 F. Supp. 870 |
Parties | Petition of CAPUTO. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Jackson G. Cook, New York City, for petitioner, Edward L. Dubroff, Brooklyn, N. Y., of counsel.
Harry Addelson, U. S. Naturalization Examiner, Brooklyn, N. Y.
This petition is opposed by reason of the applicant's having answered question 41 "Yes" on Selective Service Form DSS 304 (Alien's Personal History and Statement) on May 22, 1942 filed with his Local Board, when he was called for military service.
The answer meant: "I do object to service in the land or naval forces of the United States."
The petitioner was then an enemy alien by reason of his Italian birth, and was legally present in this country.
The applicable Section of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 reads:
"§ 315(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 405(b), any alien who applies or has applied for exemption or discharge from training or service in the armed forces or in the National Security Training Corps of the United States on the ground that he is an alien, and is or was relieved or discharged from such training or service on such ground, shall be permanently ineligible to become a citizen of the United States." 8 U.S.C.A. § 1426 (a).
When the application for exemption was made, this country was at war with Italy, but by January 1944 that condition had come to an end, and he was called again before his Local Board; the Selective Service records reveal the following subsequent history of the registrant:
Recurring to the statute above quoted, it will be seen that two conditions are requisite to the permanent ineligibility to citizenship on the part of an alien: (a) the application for exemption on the ground of alienage, and (b) that he "was relieved or discharged from such training or service on such ground."
These requisites are not stated in the disjunctive, and if either fails the statutory ineligibility does not become automatic, for one is of equal importance to the other.
While on January 29, 1944 the petitioner was still an alien, he was not then an enemy alien, and so far from being relieved from training or service because of the objection asserted on May 22, 1942, he was classified 1...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United States v. Hoellger
...F.Supp. 137; Petition of Miranda, E.D.N.Y.1953, 111 F.Supp. 481;8 Petition of Berini, E.D.N.Y. 1953, 112 F.Supp. 837;7 Petition of Caputo, E.D.N.Y.1954, 118 F.Supp. 870;7 Petition of Zumsteg, S.D.N.Y.1954, 122 F.Supp. 670;78 Petition of Fleischmann, S.D.N.Y.1956, 141 F.Supp. 292;8 Petition ......
-
Matter of H----
...service and never served in the armed forces. The rationale for the grant varies from case to case. Felleson, supra, refers to Kiviranta and Caputo, infra, as "rejected by an overwhelming array of authorities." This group seems to be the minority view: Petition of Caputo, 118 F. Supp. 870 (......
-
In re Wendt, Petition No. 451214.
...108, 228 F.2d 455 (1955); In Matter of Petition for Naturalization of Fabbri, 254 F.Supp. 858 (E.D.Mich.1966); Petition of Caputo, 118 F.Supp. 870 (E.D.N.Y.1954). Still other cases have held that an attempted withdrawal of the claim of exemption, or a reclassification of the alien by the lo......
-
IN RE PETITION FOR NATURALIZATION OF FABBRI
...732; In re Regan, D.C., 244 F.Supp. 664. It seems to us, however, that the better reasoning is that of the following cases: Petition of Caputo, D.C., 118 F.Supp. 870; United States v. Hoellger, 2 Cir., 273 F.2d 760; United States v. Bazan, 97 U.S.App. D.C. 108, 228 F.2d 455; and In re Kadic......