Interim Decision #2621 

MATTER OF SULLEN 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-21778510 

Decided by Board November 7, 1977 

(1) In visa petition proceedings, the burden of establishing the claimed relationship is upon 

the petitioner. 

(2) In order to qualify as a "daughter" for preference purposes under section 203(a)(2) of 

the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1153(a)(2), the beneficiary must once have qualified as the child of the 

petitioner under section 101(b)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(I). 

(3) The term "legitimate" as used in section 101(b)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. 111)1(a)(1)(A), refers 

solely to a child born in wedlock. The beneficiary was not born in wedlock, and she 

therefore cannot qualify as the petitioner's legitimate child. 

(4) Under the law of New York; the petitioner's home state of record, the natural parents 

must marry in order to legitimate the child. 

(5) Under the law of Grenada, the beneficiary's residence and domicile, a child born before 

the marriage of his parents shall be considered their legitimate child from the date of 

their marriage or from the time of the passage of the Legitimation Ordinance of that 

country, whichever happened last; or the Supreme Court may issue a decree that a 

person is legitimated. 

CO The petitioner has not presented evidence to show that the beneficiary was legitimated 

under the law of the child's residence or domicile, or under the law of his residence or 

domicile as required by section 101(b)(1)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S. C. I101(a)(1)(C). 

ON Bion.A.Er or Purrrrormn: Benjamin Sneed, Esquire 

209 West 125th Street 

New York, New York 10027 

Milhollan, Chairman; Wilson, Maniatis, Appleman, and Maguire, Board Members 

The lawful permanent resident petitioner applied for preference classhication for the beneficiary as hie unmarried daughter under section 

203(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. In a decision dated 

-.Aamil 19, 1977, the District Director denied the petition. The petitioner 

1ias appealed. The appeal will be dismissed. 

The petitioner is a native and citizen of Grenada. He was admitted to 

thie United States as a lawful permanent resident alien on August 19, 

1972. The beneficiary is a single female alien who is a native, citizen, and 

resident of Grenada. She was born on August 1, 1953. 

In support of his petition, the petitioner submitted an affidavit dated 

578 
Interim Decision #2621 

February 7, 1977, in which he stated that he is the natural father of the 

beneficiary, and that he provided for and maintained the beneficiary 

during the period that he resided with the beneficiary's mother in 

Grenada. Also of record are two affidavits from individuals who state 

that they are friends of the petitioner and have personal knowledge that 

the petitioner and the beneficiary's mother lived together in Grenada 

and that the beneficiary was born of that relationship. These affidavits 

were executed in New York on February 5, 1977. 

Further, the record contains a statutory declaration executed in Grenada on June 25, 1973. In that declaration a citizen of Grenada states 

that she knows the petitioner; that the petitioner is the father of an 

illegitimate child named Carmen Fay Ann; and that the mother of that 

child is named Doris Bullen. A record of birth registration issued in 

Grenada on March 5, 1974, is of record. That document reflects tha,t a 

female child was born to Doris Sullen on August 1, 1953, and that the 

child's name "Carmen Fay Ann" was added to the register on 

November 4, 1953. The name of the.father of the child was not listed in 

the birth registration record. 

In visa petition proceedings, the burden of establishing the claimed 

relationship is upon the petitioner. Matter of Brantigan, 11 I. & N. Dec. 

493 (BIA 1966). In order to qualify as a "daughter" for preference 

purposes, the beneficiary must once have qualified as the child of the 

petitioner under section 101(b)(1) of the Act. Nazareno v. Attorney 

General, 512 F.2d 936 (D.C. Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 44 U.S.L.W. 3201 

(No. 74-1473); Matter of James,Interim Decision 2461 (BIA 1975); Matter of Coker, 14 I. & N. Dee. 521 (BIA 1974). The only subdivisions of 

section 101(b)(1) which may possibly be relevant to this ease are (A) and 

(C), which provide: 

The term "child" means an unmarried person under twenty -one years 

of age who is— 

(A) a legitimate child; or 

(C) a child legitimated under the law of the child's residence or domicile, or under the 

law of the father's residence or domicile, whether in or outside the United States, if such 

legitimation takes place before the child reaches the age of eighteen years and the child 

is in the legal custody of the legitimating parent or parents at the time of such 

legitimation. 

The term legitimate" as used in section 101(b)(1)(A) refers solely to a 

child born in wedlock. See Matter of James, supra; Matter of Dela Rosa, 

14 I. & N. Dec. 728 (BIA 1974); Matter of Kubicka, 14 I. & N. Dec. 303 

(BIA 1972). The beneficiary was not born in wedlock, and she therefoie 

cannot qualify as the petitioner's legitimate child. _ 

With respect to legitimation, the petitioner has not presented evidence to show that the beneficiary was legitimated under the law of the 

379 
Interim Decision #2621 

child's residence or domicile, or under the law of his residence or 

domicile as required by section 101(b)(1)(C) of the Act. Under the law of 

New York, the petitioner's home state of record, the natural parents 

must marry in order to legitimate the child.' See Matter of Archer, 10 I. 

& N. Dee. 92 (BIA 1962). 

Inasmuch as the beneficiary is a resident and domiciliary of Grenada, 

we directed an inquiry to the Library of Congress to ascertain what the 

law of legitimation is in that country. A memorandum of law prepared 

by the Library of Congress dated September of 1977, is attached hereto 

and made a part hereof. According to the information furnished by the 

Library of Congress, under the law of Grenada, a child born before the 

marriage of his parents shall be considered their legitimate child from 

the date of their marriage or from the time of the passage of the 

Legitimation Ordinance of that country, whichever happened last. 

Further, the Supreme Court of Grenada may issue a decree that a 

person is a legitimated person. 

The petitioner has not demonstrated that he has complied with the 

requirements of legitimation under the law of New York or Grenada. 

Therefore, we conclude that on the basis of the record, he has failed to 

sustain his burden of proving that the beneficiary qualifies as his daughter under section 203(a)(2) of the Act. We note that in his decision, the 

District Director referred to section 201(b) of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act which is inapplicable to this case since the petitioner is 

not a United States citizen. Notwithstanding this irrelevant reference, 

the decision of the District Director is affirmed. The appeal accordingly 

is dismissed. 

ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 

ADDENDUM 

GRENADA 

The few requirements for legitimation in Grenada are found in the 

Legitimation Ordinance.' The parents must enter into a marriage, the 

father must be domiciled in Grenada at the time of the marriage, and 

neither party could be married to a third person at the time of the 

illegitimate birth. 2This marriage legitimizes the child from the date of 

the marriage or from the time of the passage of the Ordinance 

whichever happened last. 

' Section 24, Domestic Relations Law, McKinney's Consolidated Laws of flew York.. 

Gren. Laws, c. 161 (1929), as amended to date. 

§ 3. 

380 
Interim Decision #2621 

The Supreme Court may issue a decree that a person is a legitimated 

person. 3Such a person may obtain such a decree by applying to the 

Supreme Court and submitting an affidavit confirming the same. The 

applicant does not have to be domiciled in Grenada ar be a natural-born 

British subject at the time he applies. Such a decree is binding on Her 

Majesty and on all other persons. 

This petition and its affidavit must be delivered to the Attorney 

General, the respondent in the proceedings, one month before the 

petition is presented or filed with the Supreme Court. The Court shall 

determine whether any other persons shall be summoned to the proceedings and who may become parties to the proceedings and oppose the 

petition. 

Prepared by 

(Mrs.) Jean V. Swartz 

Senior Legal Specialist 

American-British Law Division 

Law Library, Library of Congress 

September 1977 

' Id. §4. 

381