United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-60167

Summary Calendar

Andre Joseph, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A030 582 729

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Andre Joseph, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, entered 

the United States in June 1970 as a lawful permanent resident. He was 

deported twice and illegally reentered the United States twice. As relief from 

his third removal, Joseph argued before the Board of Immigration Appeals 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 29, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-60167 Document: 00516109431 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/29/2021
No. 20-60167

2

(“BIA”) that he became a nationalized citizen in 1984, when he enlisted in

the United States Navy.

The Immigration and Nationality Act provides for judicial review of 

removal orders where, as here, the petitioner’s nationality is at issue. See 8 

U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), (b)(5). Under these provisions, “a court of appeals is 

directed to conduct a de novo determination, based on the record, of an 

alien’s claim of nationality.” Lopez v. Holder, 563 F.3d 107, 110 (5th Cir. 

2009) (citing Marquez-Marquez v. Gonzalez, 455 F.3d 548, 554 (5th Cir. 

2006)). Where “the petitioner claims to be a national of the United States 

and the court of appeals finds that the pleadings and affidavits present no 

genuine issue of material fact regarding nationality, the court of appeals ‘shall 

decide the nationality claim.’” Id. (quoting § 1252(b)(5)(A)).

Even construing Joseph’s pro se brief liberally,see Yohey v. Collins, 985 

F.2d 222, 224–25 (5th Cir. 1993), he has not demonstrated a genuine issue of 

material fact with respect to his citizenship claim. To become a naturalized 

citizen, a person must complete the naturalization process, Omolo v. 

Gonzales, 452 F.3d 404, 408–09 (5th Cir. 2006), by, inter alia, filing an 

application for naturalization, 8 U.S.C. § 1445, and taking an oath of 

allegiance at a public ceremony, 8 U.S.C. § 1448(a). A person who 

successfully completes the naturalization process is entitled to a certificate of 

naturalization. 8 U.S.C. § 1449. There is no evidence that Joseph satisfied

any of these requirements. Because there is not a genuine issue of material 

fact regarding Joseph’s nationality, see Lopez, 563 F.3d at 110, his petition for 

review is DENIED.

Joseph also seeks to supplement the administrative record with 

documents demonstrating, among other things, his work authorization 

status, military service, and social security number. Our review is limited to 

the administrative record, see Kane v. Holder, 581 F.3d 231, 242 n.44 (5th Cir. 

Case: 20-60167 Document: 00516109431 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/29/2021
No. 20-60167

3

2009), which already includes most of these documents. In any event, none 

of them are material to Joseph’s claim of citizenship. Accordingly, his two 

motions to supplement the record are DENIED.

Case: 20-60167 Document: 00516109431 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/29/2021