Legal Opinion

United States v. Hovsepian

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 6, 2005No. Nos. 99-50041, 99-56922, 01-55247PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRABER, Circuit Judge:

This case comes before the en banc court for the second time. The first time, in United States v. Hovsepian, 359 F.3d 1144, 1165-69 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc), we reversed the district court’s decision to administer the oath of citizenship to Appel-lees Viken Hovsepian and Viken Yacoubian because of legal errors in the court’s consideration of their applications for naturalization. On remand, the government pursued additional discovery and the court took further evidence and heard argument, again finding that Appellees had established that they possess good moral…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Kungys v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. United States v. HovsepianCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  4. Yuen Jung v. BarberCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. GOMEZ-BELTRANBoard of Immigration Appeals · 2016
  2. Hajro v. BarrettDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2012
  3. Lawson v. United States Citizenship & Immigration ServicesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2011
  4. Sameh Hussein v. Robin BarrettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  5. Atalla v. United States Citizenship & Immigration ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API