Matter of Moorman (Board decision, July 28, 1964)

Matter of Moorman (BIA ID 1389): U.S. birthplace allowed adjustment despite Canadian quota treatment

Decision type
Board decision
Dockets
ID 1389, A-12977383
Decided
July 28, 1964
Outcome
Other
Precedential status
Citable Board precedent
Checked against source
2026-10-15

Apply this precedent to your situation

This is citable Board precedent from 1964, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1964
The immigration statutes and regulations may have been amended, and later Board or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.
Final INS decision
The District Director approved the application for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status. This published decision resolves the application before the District Director. It is not an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals; the Board-order finality rule in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(7) does not govern it.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official BIA release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Transcribed from a scanned original: BIA released this decision as an image-only file. The full text below is a machine transcription, proofread against the scan. Check the official release before quoting exact language.
Read the official release (justice.gov)

Plain-English summary

The applicant was born in Kansas, later lived in Canada, and lost her U.S. citizenship by voting in a Canadian election. She entered the United States as a student and applied to adjust to permanent resident status. The District Director explained that the statute treated her as born in Canada for immigrant quota purposes, but she was actually born in the United States. The bar on adjustment for natives of a country contiguous to the United States therefore did not apply. The District Director granted the application. The outcome is classified as other because this was an initial approval of an adjustment application, with no lower decision to affirm or set aside.

Decision snapshot

  • Cited authority: Nationality Act of 1940 § 401(e); Immigration and Nationality Act §§ 101(a)(15)(F), 101(a)(27)(C), 202(a)(3), and 245(a), (c).
  • Outcome: Application for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status approved.
  • Key point: Deemed Canadian birth for quota purposes did not make a person actually born in Kansas a native of Canada under the adjustment bar.

Full text (BIA official public release)

Interim Decision #1389

MATTER OF MOORMAN

In SECTION 245 Proceedings

A-12977383

Decided by District Director July 28, 1964

An alien who entered as a nonimmigrant student and who was born in the United States but was expatriated under section 401(e) of the Nationality Act of 1940 is not precluded by section 245(c), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, from adjusting her status to that of a lawful permanent resident under section 245(a) of the Act since she is not, in fact, a native of a country contiguous to the United States, even though under section 202(a)(3) of the Act she is considered, for quota purposes, as having been born in Canada and to be a nonquota immigrant under section 101(a)(27)(C) of the Act.

The applicant was born in Meade, Kansas on August 3, 1910 and was a United States citizen at birth. Her parents were also born in the United States. Her father first went to Canada on May 15, 1912, being followed on August 23, 1912 by the applicant, her mother, and other children in the family. Her father was naturalized in Canada on April 19, 1915. In April 1920, the applicant and family returned to the United States. On September 11, 1923, the applicant returned to Canada and was married in 1951 to Stanley Moorman, a naturalized citizen of Canada.

The applicant voluntarily voted in Canadian provincial elections on May 10, 1952 and September 19, 1956. At that time she knew she had been born in the United States and the record does not establish that she had been informed by any official that she had no claim to United States citizenship. By her act of voting on May 10, 1952, the applicant lost her United States citizenship under the provisions of section 401(e) of the Nationality Act of 1940.

Section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, provides that the status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. Subparagraph (c) of section 245 further provides that the provisions of the section shall not be applicable to any alien who is ". . . a native of any country contiguous to the United States . . .".

Section 202(a)(3) of the Act provides that "an alien born in the United States shall be considered as having been born in the country of which he is a citizen or subject, or if he is not a citizen or subject of any country then in the last foreign country in which he had his residence as determined by the consular officer;".

The last-cited section serves the purpose of providing a means to determine the quota to which an immigrant born in the United States shall be chargeable. Under the terms of this section, the applicant is considered to be a nonquota immigrant under section 101(a)(27)(C) of the Act, as though she were born in Canada. Although by its terms, the applicant, for quota purposes, is considered as having been born in Canada, she is not, as a matter of fact, a native of Canada, a country contiguous to the United States. She is not precluded under section 245(c), therefore, from being granted status as a lawful permanent resident.

The applicant last entered the United States on January 28, 1963 as a student in practical nursing under the provisions of section 101(a)(15)(F) of the Act. She was inspected and admitted. She is in all respects eligible to have her status adjusted to that of a lawful permanent resident under section 245 and her application will be granted.

It is ordered that the application for status as a lawful permanent resident under section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, be approved.

Does this precedent still control your case?

Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and applies it to your situation with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace