IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-40525

Summary Calendar

LAURA JOSEFINA SALINAS MOYA,

Plaintiff – Appellant

v.

NORMA LIMON, Harlingen Field Office Director, Citizenship and 

Immigration Services,

Defendant – Appellee 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:16-CV-319

Before WIENER, HAYNES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Laura Josefina Salinas Moya (Plaintiff) sought a declaratory judgment 

that she is a United States citizen. At trial, her citizenship status came down 

to whether her mother was born in the United States. As proof of her mother’s 

birth in the United States, Plaintiff offered the testimony of a relative who 

stated that the mother told her several times that she was born in Weslaco, 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 9, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 19-40525 Document: 00515228382 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/09/2019
No. 19-40525

2

Texas. The mother’s baptismal certificate also lists Weslaco as the place of 

birth. But both the mother’s Mexican birth certificate and Mexican marriage 

certificate list Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico, as the place of birth. After 

considering this competing evidence, the district court ruled that “Plaintiff did 

not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that [her mother] was born in the 

United States and therefore failed to establish Plaintiff is a United States 

citizen.” 

On appeal, Plaintiff argues that it was error to admit the Mexican birth 

certificate. But Plaintiff did not object to the exhibit at trial. More than that, 

she offered the birth certificate as an exhibit. She cannot now complain about 

this evidence she offered into the record.

Plaintiff further argues that the district court failed to give any weight 

to the baptismal certificate. But the district court did consider the baptismal 

certificate, it just concluded that the baptismal certificate—along with the 

testimony of the relative, who did not meet Plaintiff’s mother until the mother 

was ten and living in Mexico—failed to meet Plaintiff’s burden of proof given 

the different birthplace listed in the birth and marriage certificates. As the 

factfinder, the district court determines the weight to give competing evidence. 

Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 123 (1969). That 

principle also defeats Plaintiff’s argument that the district court had to give 

the baptismal certificate more weight than the birth and marriage certificates 

because the baptismal document was created earlier. There is no rule that 

older evidence is automatically more credible; the factfinder may consider 

numerous factors in determining what evidence is most convincing. Because 

these and other arguments Plaintiff raises ask us to reweigh the evidence, they 

are not a basis for reversal.

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 19-40525 Document: 00515228382 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/09/2019