Legal Opinion
United States v. Hovsepian
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 2, 2004No. Nos. 99-50041, 99-56922, 00-55320, 01-55247PublishedCited by 176 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRABER, Circuit Judge.
On August 18, 2000, the district court administered the oath of citizenship to Ap-pellees Viken Hovsepian and Viken Yacou-bian. That naturalization ceremony was the culmination of a 16-year struggle between Appellees and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”),1 which had sought to deport them. In this appeal, the INS argues that the district court’s decision to naturalize Appellees was fundamentally flawed. The district court dealt admirably with this complex case over a long period of time. Because, however, the district court committed legal errors that…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- United States v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Davis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination CommitteeSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by176 opinions
- Claudio Arce v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Aronov v. NapolitanoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2009
- Kai Tung Chan v. Mary Ann Gantner, Interim District Director, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Docket No. 05-4573-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Etape v. ChertoffCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
171 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.