Eloisa Hernandez v. L. Francis Cissna
705 F. App'x 634
9th Cir.2017Background
- Eloisa Maria Hernandez sought recognition of derivative U.S. citizenship; district court denied her summary judgment and granted the government’s cross-motion. Appeal followed.
- Central factual dispute: whether Hernandez’s birth mother was Socorro Maldonado Alcaraz (Mexican citizen) or Bertha Hernandez Flores (U.S. citizen/adoptive mother).
- Key documentary evidence: (1) 1983 Arizona Notice of Hearing for termination of parent-child relationship and adoption naming Alcaraz as natural mother and Flores as prospective adoptive mother; (2) Arizona Order of Adoption creating parent–child relationship between Flores and Hernandez; (3) Form I-130 in which Flores represented that she had adopted Hernandez.
- Hernandez’s Mexican birth certificate (issued in 1980 at Flores’s request) lists Flores as “mother” but does not distinguish birth vs. adoptive status; Hernandez testified Flores told her “I adopted you.”
- District court and Ninth Circuit concluded the documentary evidence clearly and convincingly showed Flores was adoptive mother, making Hernandez ineligible for derivative citizenship under 8 U.S.C. § 1409(c).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hernandez’s citizenship certificate was issued in error | Hernandez contends Flores was her birth mother, so she qualifies for derivative citizenship | Government argues Flores was adoptive mother per adoption records and I-130, so Hernandez is ineligible | Certificate was issued in error; Hernandez is ineligible for derivative citizenship |
| Sufficiency of evidence standard (clear and convincing) | Hernandez argues her testimony and birth certificate support birth-mother claim | Government relies on adoption order, hearing notice, and I-130 to meet clear-and-convincing standard | Documentary adoption evidence meets clear-and-convincing standard; no genuine dispute |
| Credibility and weight of testimonial evidence | Hernandez and half-brother testify Flores said she adopted her but also may be perceived as birth mother | Government argues testimonial belief is subjective and of little probative value | Court gives limited weight to subjective testimony; summary judgment appropriate |
| Effect of Mexican birth certificate listing Flores as "mother" | Hernandez points to certificate as proof Flores was birth mother | Government notes certificate doesn’t specify birth vs. adoptive mother and was issued years later at Flores’s request | Birth certificate insufficient to overcome adoption records; does not create material factual dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Mondaca-Vega v. Lynch, 808 F.3d 413 (9th Cir. 2015) (en banc) (clear-and-convincing proof required to revoke citizenship certificate)
- Berezovsky v. Moniz, 869 F.3d 923 (9th Cir. 2017) (summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- Lee Hon Lung v. Dulles, 261 F.2d 719 (9th Cir. 1958) (historical precedent on citizenship/adoption issues)
- United States ex rel. Kelly v. Serco, Inc., 846 F.3d 325 (9th Cir. 2017) (standards for granting summary judgment when evidence is merely colorable)
Affirmed.