Court Opinion

ID: 9948182
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-06 17:07:15.658864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:29:19.571207
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                                       Mar 06 2024, 9:26 am

                                                                                              CLERK
                                                                                          Indiana Supreme Court
                                                                                             Court of Appeals
                                                                                               and Tax Court

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS
Charles P. Rice
Murphy Rice, LLP
Mishawaka, Indiana

                                           IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

In the Matter of the Adoption of                        March 6, 2024
Baby Girl;                                              Court of Appeals Case No.
                                                        23A-AD-1590
C.M. and K.M.,
                                                        Appeal from the Marion Superior
Appellants-Petitioners                                  Court
______________________________                          The Honorable Ryan K. Gardner,
                                                        Judge
In the Matter of the Paternity of                       Trial Court Cause Nos.
                                                        49D10-2208-AD-29367
L.A. (Minor Child);                                     49D10-2301-JP-17
Y.N.

Appellee-Plaintiff

v

K.Q.A.

Respondent

and

C.M. and K.M.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                    Page 1 of 18
      Appellants-Intervenors

                                           Opinion by Judge Pyle

                                    Judges Tavitas and Foley concur.

      Pyle, Judge.

      Statement of the Case
[1]   C.M. and K.M. (“Adoptive Parents”) appeal the trial court’s order, which

      established Y.N.’s (“Putative Father”) paternity of L.A. (“L.A.”). Adoptive

      Parents argue that Putative Father was barred from establishing paternity

      because his consent to L.A.’s adoption had been irrevocably implied when he

      failed to timely register with the Putative Father Registry (“the Registry”).

      Concluding that Putative Father’s consent to L.A.’s adoption had been

      irrevocably implied as a result of his failure to timely register with the Registry

      and that he was, therefore, barred from challenging the adoption or establishing

      paternity, we reverse the trial court’s judgment.

[2]   We reverse.

      Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024           Page 2 of 18
      Issue
              Whether Putative Father was barred from establishing paternity
              because his consent to L.A.’s adoption had been irrevocably
              implied when he failed to timely register with the Registry.

      Facts
[3]   K.Q.A. (“K.Q.A.”) gave birth to L.A. on August 15, 2022. Two days later, on

      August 17, 2022, K.Q.A. executed a consent to the adoption of L.A. Pursuant

      to the terms of this consent, K.Q.A. surrendered care and control of L.A. to

      KidsFirst Adoption Services, LLC (“KidsFirst”) and granted KidsFirst the

      authority to place L.A. for adoption. Also on August 17, 2022, K.Q.A.

      executed an affidavit of birthfather identity, wherein she stated that she was

      unwilling to name L.A.’s biological father. That same day, Adoptive Parents

      took custody of L.A. One week later, on August 25, 2022, Adoptive Parents

      filed a petition to adopt L.A.

[4]   On September 29, 2022, Adoptive Parents filed a motion for determination,

      wherein they stated that Putative Father had registered with the Putative Father

      Registry on September 23, 2022. Adoptive Parents’ motion further provides, in

      relevant part, as follows:

              6.       The applicable statute, Section 31-19-5-12 – Time of
                       registration, provides that:

                       (a)     To be entitled to notice of an adoption under IC 31-
                               19-3 or IC 31-19-4, a putative father must register
                               with the state department of health under section 5
                               of this chapter not later than:

      Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024            Page 3 of 18
                         (1)      thirty (30) days after the child’s birth; or

                         (2)      the earlier of the date of the filing of a
                                  petition for the:

                                  (A)      child’s adoption; or

                                  (B)      termination of the parent-child
                                           relationship between the child and the
                                           mother;

                 whichever occurs later.

        7.       The Putative Father’s registration with the Division of
                 Vital Records was completed thirty-nine (39) days after the
                 date the Child was born. The Petition for Adoption was
                 filed on an earlier date. Therefore, the Putative Father’s
                 registration with the Putative Father Registry was not
                 made in accordance with the applicable statute, and was
                 not timely filed.

        8.       Section 31-19-5-18 – Waiver of notice of rights of
                 unregistered putative fathers; irrevocably implied consent
                 to adoption, states that:

                 A putative father who fails to register within the period
                 specified by section 12 of this chapter waives notice of an
                 adoption proceeding. The putative father’s waiver under
                 this section constitutes an irrevocably implied consent to
                 the child’s adoption.

        9.       According to the applicable statute, Putative Father failed
                 to file with the Putative Father Registry on a timely basis
                 and therefore is not entitled to notice of the adoption
                 proceedings, and his consent to the adoption is irrevocably
                 implied.

        10.      [Adoptive Parents] hereby request[] that the Court enter an
                 order confirming that Putative Father is not entitled to

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                    Page 4 of 18
                       notice of the adoption proceedings and that his consent to
                       the adoption is irrevocably implied.

      (App. Vol. 2 at 11-12).

[5]   One day later, on September 30, 2022, the trial court found that Putative Father

      had timely registered with the Registry and denied Adoptive Parents’ motion

      for determination. The trial court’s order specifically provides as follows:

              A putative father who registers within thirty days after the child’s
              birth or the date the adoption petition is filed, whichever occurs
              later, is entitled to notice of the adoption. In re Paternity of
              G.W., 983 N.E.2d 1193, 1197 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). The
              adoption petition was filed on 8/26/22, and the putative father
              was registered on 9/23/22.

      (App. Vol. 2 at 16).

[6]   On October 10, 2022, Adoptive Parents filed a motion to correct error, wherein

      they argued, in relevant part, as follows:

              7.       The Court’s interpretation [of INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-
                       12] is at odds with the applicable statute and case law
                       interpreting that statute and is clear error.

              8.       The applicable statute, Section 31-19-5-12 – Time of
                       registration, provides that:

                       (a)     To be entitled to notice of an adoption under IC 31-
                               19-3 or IC 31-19-4, a putative father must register
                               with the state department of health under section 5
                               of this chapter not later than:

                               (1)      thirty (30) days after the child’s birth; or

      Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                 Page 5 of 18
                         (2)      the earlier of the date of the filing of a
                                  petition for the:

                                  (A)      child’s adoption; or

                                  (B)      the termination of the parent-child
                                           relationship between the child and the
                                           child’s mother:

                 whichever occurs later (emphasis added).

                                  *        *       *        *      *

        10.      Based on the application of the statute, the pertinent dates
                 would be September 14, 2022 (thirty (30) days after the
                 date of the child’s birth) and August 26, 2022 (the date of
                 the filing of the petition[)]. The Court’s erroneous ruling is
                 at odds with the Court of Appeals interpretation of the
                 statute: That the thirty (30) day period is only applied to
                 the date of the child’s birth, not the date the petition was
                 filed.

        11.      These time limitations are supported by State Form 46750,
                 Indiana Putative Father Registration, which clearly states
                 the following: “Return this completed form to the Indiana
                 Putative Father Registry within thirty (30) days after the
                 birth of the child or prior to the filing of the petition for
                 adoption (emphasis added).

        12.      The Putative Father’s registration with the Division of
                 Vital Records was completed thirty-nine (39) days after the
                 date the Child was born, and nine (9) days after the time
                 period for registering had passed. The Petition for
                 Adoption had been filed on an earlier date. Therefore, the
                 Putative Father’s registration with the Putative Father
                 Registry was not made in accordance with the applicable
                 statute, and was not timely filed.

                                 *        *        *       *       *

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                    Page 6 of 18
              15.      [Adoptive Parents] hereby request[] that the Court correct
                       the error of denying [their] motion and enter an order
                       confirming that Putative Father is not entitled to notice of
                       the adoption proceedings and that his consent to the
                       adoption is irrevocably implied.

      (App. Vol. 2 at 18-19).

[7]   The following day, October 11, 2022, the trial court denied Adoptive Parents’

      motion to correct error. The trial court’s order provides as follows:

              The Court of Appeals has routinely held that a “putative father
              who registers within thirty days after the child’s birth or the date
              the adoption petition is filed, whichever occurs later, is entitled to
              notice of the child’s adoption.” In re K.G.B., 18 N.E.3d 292, 298
              (Ind. Ct. App. 2014); In re Paternity of G.W., 983 N.E.2d 1193,
              1197 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013); In re Adoption of J.D.C., 751 N.E.2d
              747, 749 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001).

      (App. Vol. 2 at 20).

[8]   On October 21, 2022, the trial court certified its orders for interlocutory appeal.

      However, on December 5, 2022, this Court denied Adoptive Parents’ motion to

      accept jurisdiction of the interlocutory appeal.

[9]   On December 8, 2022, Adoptive Parents served Putative Father with notice of

      the adoption. This notice advised Putative Father that if he wanted to contest

      the adoption, he had to “file a motion to contest the adoption in accordance

      with IC 31-19-10-1 in the [Marion Superior Court] not later than thirty (30)

      days after the date of service of this notice.” (App. Vol. 2 at 36).

      Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                Page 7 of 18
[10]   On January 3, 2023, Putative Father filed an action to establish paternity of

       L.A. Adoptive Parents filed a motion to consolidate the adoption action and

       the paternity action, which the trial court granted. Putative Father did not file a

       motion to contest the adoption.

[11]   On January 13, 2023, Adoptive Parents filed a motion for determination that

       Putative Father’s consent to the adoption was not required because Putative

       Father had failed to file a motion to contest the adoption within thirty days of

       receiving the notice of adoption. On January 20, 2023, the trial court denied

       Adoptive Parents’ motion. Adoptive Parents filed a motion to reconsider on

       February 2 2023. After holding a hearing, the trial court denied Adoptive

       Parents’ motion to reconsider on April 13, 2023.

[12]   In June 2023, Adoptive Parents filed a DNA test report, which revealed that

       Putative Father is L.A.’s biological father. In July 2023, the trial court issued

       an order establishing Putative Father’s paternity of L.A. In addition, the trial

       court made “an express determination that there [was] no just reason for delay

       and expressly direct[ed] entry of a final appealable judgment of the judgment of

       paternity.” (App. Vol. 2 at 77).

[13]   Adoptive Parents now appeal.

       Decision
[14]   Adoptive Parents argue that Putative Father was barred from establishing

       paternity because his consent to L.A.’s adoption had been irrevocably implied

       when he failed to timely register with the Registry. We agree.
       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024          Page 8 of 18
[15]   At the outset, we note that Putative Father did not file an appellee’s brief.

       When an appellee fails to file a brief, we do not undertake the burden of

       developing arguments for him, and we apply a less stringent standard of review.

       Zoller v. Zoller, 858 N.E.2d 124, 126 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). We may reverse if the

       appellant establishes prima facie error. Id. Prima facie is defined as “at first

       sight, on first appearance, or on the face of it.” Graziani v. D & R Construction,

       39 N.E.3d 688, 690 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). “This rule was established so that we

       might be relieved of the burden of controverting the arguments advanced in

       favor of reversal where that burden properly rests with the appellee.” Bixler v.

       Delano, 185 N.E.3d 875, 878 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022). “Still, we are obligated to

       correctly apply the law to the facts in the record in order to determine whether

       reversal is required.” Jenkins v. Jenkins, 17 N.E.3d 350, 352 (Ind. Ct. App.

       2014).

[16]   We further note that a brief overview of the Registry is helpful. Indiana

       established the Registry in 1994. In re Adoption of K.G.B., 18 N.E.3d 292, 296

       (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). The purpose of the Registry “is to provide notice to a

       putative father that a petition for adoption has been filed.” Id. at 297. A

       “putative father” for purposes of the adoption statutes is a male who is alleged

       to be or claims that he may be a child’s father but who is not statutorily

       presumed to be the child’s father and has not established paternity before the

       filing of an adoption petition. INDIANA CODE § 31-9-2-100. “The Registry

       serves in part to preserve a father’s right to oppose an adoption while

       simultaneously assuring the biological mother and adoptive parents that, when

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024             Page 9 of 18
       a putative father fails to register after a set time, an adoption can proceed

       without apprehension that it might later be upended.” In re B.W., 908 N.E.2d

       586, 587 n.3 (Ind. 2009). Further, “Indiana has a strong interest in providing

       stable homes for children. To this end, early, permanent placement of children

       with adoptive families furthers the interest of both the child and the state.” In re

       Paternity of Baby Doe, 734 N.E.2d 281, 287 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (cleaned up).

[17]   Statutes governing a putative father’s registration on the Registry apply

       whenever:

                (1)    an adoption under IC 31-19-2 has been or may be filed
                regarding a child who may have been conceived by the putative
                father; and

                (2)    on or before the date the child’s mother executes a consent
                to the child’s adoption, the child’s mother has not disclosed the
                name or address, or both, of the putative father to the attorney or
                agency that is arranging the child’s adoption.

       I.C. § 31-19-5-1(a).1

                If, on or before the date the mother of the child executes a
                consent to the child’s adoption, the mother does not disclose to
                an attorney or agency that:

                         (1)      is arranging; or

                         (2)      may arrange;

       1
         However, the putative father registry statutes do not apply “if, on or before the date the child’s mother
       executes a consent to the child’s adoption, the child’s mother discloses the name and address of the putative
       father to the attorney or agency that is arranging the child’s adoption.” I.C. § 31-19-5-1(b).

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                                 Page 10 of 18
                an adoption of the child the name or address, or both, of the
                putative father of the child, the putative father must register
                under this chapter to entitle the putative father to notice of the
                child’s adoption.

       I.C. § 31-19-5-5.

[18]   Further, the version of the statute in effect at the time Adoptive Parents filed the

       petition to adopt L.A. provided as follows:

                (a)      To be entitled to notice of an adoption under IC 31-19-3 or
                         IC 31-19-4, a putative father must register with the state
                         department of health under section 5 of this chapter no
                         later than:

                         (1)      thirty (30) days after the child’s birth; or

                         (2)      the earlier of the date of the filing of the petition for
                                  the:

                                  (A)      child’s adoption; or

                                  (B)      the termination of the parent-child
                                           relationship between the child and the child’s
                                           mother;

                whichever occurs later.

       I.C. § 31-19-5-12(a).2 Additionally, “[a] putative father may register under

       subsection (a) before the child’s birth.” I.C. § 31-19-5-12(b).

       2
        The legislature amended the statue effective July 2023. Specifically, the legislature changed the “state
       department of health” to the “state department.” Thus, the substance of the statute remained the same.

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                                 Page 11 of 18
[19]   “A putative father who fails to register within the period specified by [INDIANA

       CODE § 31-19-5-12(a)] waives notice of an adoption proceeding. The putative

       father’s waiver under this section constitutes an irrevocably implied consent to

       the child’s adoption.” I.C. § 31-19-5-18. See also I.C. § 31-19-9-12 (providing

       that “[a] putative father’s consent to adoption is irrevocably implied without

       further court action if the putative father . . . (4) is required to but fails to

       register with the putative father registry established by IC 31-19-5 within the

       period under IC 31-19-5-12”).

[20]   Further, a putative father “whose consent to adoption is [irrevocably] implied

       under . . . IC 31-19-5-18 is not entitled to challenge: (1) the adoption; or (2) the

       validity of the putative father’s implied consent to the adoption.” I.C. § 31-19-

       9-13. In addition, a putative father whose consent to an adoption has been

       irrevocably implied may not establish paternity. K.G.B., 18 N.E.3d at 297; see

       also I.C. § 31-19-9-14 (stating that a putative father whose consent to the

       adoption has been statutorily irrevocably implied is not entitled to establish

       paternity of the child).

[21]   Here, K.Q.A. did not disclose the name or address of Putative Father.

       Therefore, in order to be entitled to notice of the adoption, Putative Father was

       required to comply with INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-12, which, as set forth above,

       provided as follows at the time Adoptive Parents filed the petition to adopt

       L.A.:

                (a)     To be entitled to notice of an adoption under IC 31-19-3 or
                        IC 31-19-4, a putative father must register with the state

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024              Page 12 of 18
                          department of health under section 5 of this chapter not
                          later than:

                          (1)       thirty (30) days after the child’s birth; or

                          (2)       the earlier of the date of the filing of the petition for
                                    the:

                                    (A)       child’s adoption; or

                                    (B)       the termination of the parent-child
                                              relationship between the child and the child’s
                                              mother;

                whichever occurs later.

[22]   The trial court interpreted this statute to allow Putative Father to register with

       the Registry not later than thirty days after the date of filing of the adoption

       petition.3 Adoptive Parents argue that “the Trial Court mistakenly interpreted

       3
          We note that the trial court’s order denying Adoptive Parents’ motion to correct error found that this Court “has
       routinely held that ‘a putative father who registers within thirty days after the child’s birth or the date the adoption
       petition is filed, whichever occurs later, is entitled to notice of the child’s adoption.’” (App. Vol. 2 at 20). In
       support of this finding, the trial court cited In re K.G.B., 18 N.E.3d 292, 298 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), In re Paternity of
       G.W., 983 N.E.2d 1193, 1197 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), and In re Adoption of J.D.C., 751 N.E.2d 747, 749 (Ind. Ct. App.
       2001). We have reviewed these cases and are not convinced that they stand for the proposition that the thirty-day
       statutory deadline applies to both the child’s birth and the date the adoption petition is filed. Rather, the language
       used in these cases simply tracks the language of the statute. For example, in G.W., 983 N.E.2d at 1197, we stated
       that “[a] putative father who registers within thirty days after the child’s birth or the date the adoption petition is
       filed, whichever occurs later, is entitled to notice of the child’s adoption. I.C. § 31-19-5-[12.]” We used the same
       language in J.D.C., 751 N.E.2d at 749. Further, these cases are not dispositive because the putative fathers in both
       cases failed to register with the Registry.

       In addition, although we used the same language in K.G.B., we also set forth the statutory language as follows:

                In order to be entitled to notice of an adoption, a putative father must register with the DOH
                not later than “(1) thirty (30) days after the child’s birth; or (2) the earlier of the date of the
                filing of a petition for the: (A) child’s adoption; or (B) termination of the parent-child
                relationship between the child and the child’s mother; whichever occurs later. Ind. Code § 31-
                19-5-12(a).

       K.G.B., 18 N.E.3d at 297. Further, in our analysis, we explained as follows: “In the instant matter, Putative Father
       acknowledges that he failed to register with the Registry within thirty days of the child’s birth or by the date that

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                                         Page 13 of 18
       IC 31-19-5-12(a) to allow [Putative Father] 30 days from the date of the filing of

       the adoption petition – not 30 days from the birth – to register with the

       [Registry].” (Adoptive Parents’ Br. 13). We agree with Adoptive Parents.

[23]   The outcome in this case turns on the interpretation of INDIANA CODE § 31-19-

       5-12(a) because if the trial court properly interpreted the statute, Putative

       Father’s registration with the Registry was timely. However, if Adoptive

       Parents are correct that the trial court misinterpreted the statute, Putative

       Father’s registration with the Registry was not timely. And, if Putative Father’s

       registration was untimely, his consent to the adoption was irrevocably implied

       and he was barred from establishing paternity of L.A.

[24]   The interpretation of a statute is a question of law that we review de novo. In re

       Adoption of E.S.J., 219 N.E.3d 780, 782 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023). Thus, we owe no

       deference to the trial court’s interpretation of a statute. Matter of Croney, 204

       N.E.3d 240, 241 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022). We interpret statutes with the primary

       goal of determining and fulfilling the legislature’s intent. Falletti v. State, 209

       N.E.3d 456, 460 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023). The best evidence of legislative intent is

       the language of the statute. Id. “If that language is clear and unambiguous, we

       T.B. filed the adoption petition.” Id. at 298. In sum, none of these cases support the trial court’s finding that
       Putative Father timely registered with the Registry.

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                                         Page 14 of 18
       simply apply its plain and ordinary meaning, heeding both what it ‘does say’

       and what it ‘does not say.’” Mi.D. v. State, 57 N.E.3d 809, 812 (Ind. 2016).

[25]   INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-12(a) provides that a putative father must register

       with the Registry by the later of two dates, which are set forth in subsections (1)

       and (2). INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-12(a)(1) “does say” that one of those dates is

       not later than thirty days after the child’s birth. However, INDIANA CODE § 31-

       19-5-12(a)(2) “does not say” that the other of those dates is not later than thirty

       days after the date of the filing of the adoption petition. Instead, it simply reads

       the date of the filing of the petition for the child’s adoption.

[26]   We further note that had the legislature intended for the thirty days to apply to

       both subsections (1) and (2), the legislature could have included the thirty-day

       time period in subsection (a). Or, the legislature could have repeated the thirty-

       day time period in subsection (2). The legislature did neither.

[27]   We, therefore, conclude that to comply with INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-12(a)

       and to be entitled to notice of an adoption, a putative father must register with

       the Registry not later than thirty days after the child is born or not later than the

       date of the filing of the adoption petition, whichever date occurs later.

[28]   As Adoptive Parents pointed out in their motion to correct error, this

       interpretation of the statute is consistent with the language used in the Indiana

       Putative Father’s Registration form. Specifically, that form instructs a putative

       father to “[r]eturn this completed form to the Indiana Putative Father Registry

       within thirty (30) days after the birth of the child or prior to the filing of the

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024            Page 15 of 18
       adoption petition.” (App. Vol. 2 at 14). The form does not instruct the putative

       father to return the form to the Registry within thirty days after the filing of the

       adoption petition.

[29]   In addition, this interpretation of the statute is consistent with our analysis of

       the statute in In re Adoption and Paternity of K.A.W., 99 N.E.3d 724 (Ind. Ct.

       App. 2018) and in In re I.J., 39 N.E.3d 1184 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). Specifically,

       in K.A.W., we stated as follows:

               To comply with Indiana Code section 31-19-5-12, Putative
               Father was required to register within thirty days of Child’s birth
               or by the date on which Adoptive Parents filed their petition to
               adopt Child. I.C. § 31-19-5-12(a). It is undisputed that Putative
               Father did not meet either of these deadlines. Instead, he did not
               register as a putative father until Child was over three years old
               and the adoption petition had been pending for eighteen months.
               As such, the trial court did not err by finding that his consent to
               the adoption was irrevocably implied.

       K.A.W., 99 N.E.3d at 726-27 (footnote omitted).

[30]   Further, in I.J., we stated as follows:

               The trial court determined T.M.’s registration was untimely
               under that statute because it occurred after the filing of the
               petition for adoption. (Appellant’s Br. at 16.) However,
               pursuant to the statute, a putative father would still be entitled to
               notice of an adoption if he registered “no later than . . . thirty (30)
               days after the child’s birth . . .,” Ind.Code § 31-10-5-[1]2(a),
               because the deadline is thirty days after the birth or the date the
               petition is filed, “whichever occurs later.” Id. (emphasis added).
               T.M. registered after the petition for adoption was filed, but that

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024            Page 16 of 18
               does not foreclose his right to challenge the adoption if he
               registered before I.J. was thirty days old.

       I.J., 39 N.E.3d at 1187. See also Adoption of B.Y.N., No. 23A-AD-130, at *2

       (Ind. Ct. App. June 27, 2023) (mem) (stating that “[t]o comply with Indiana

       Code section 31-19-5-12, Father was required to register within thirty days of

       Child’s birth or by the date on which Adoptive Parents filed their petition to

       adopt Child, whichever occurred later.”) Although the interpretation of the

       statute was not dispositive in any of these cases, the language that we used in

       them is consistent with the interpretation of the statute that we set forth today.

[31]   Applying our interpretation of the statute to the facts of this case, we note that

       L.A. was born on August 15, 2022, and Adoptive Parents filed a petition to

       adopt L.A. on August 25, 2022. Thus, pursuant to the terms of the statute,

       Putative Father was required to register with the Registry no later than thirty

       days after L.A.’s birth, which would have been September 14, 2022; or the date

       of the filing of the adoption petition, which was August 25, 2022. The later of

       these dates is September 14, 2022. However, Putative Father did not register

       with the Registry until September 23, 2022. Putative Father’s registration was

       untimely because it was nine days past the statutory deadline. Pursuant to

       INDIANA CODE § 31-19-5-18, Putative Father’s consent to the adoption was,

       therefore, irrevocably implied, and Putative Father was barred from challenging

       the adoption or establishing paternity. Accordingly, the trial court erred in

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024         Page 17 of 18
       entering an order establishing Putative Father’s paternity, and we reverse the

       trial court’s judgment.4

[32]   Reversed.

       Tavitas, J., and Foley, J., concur.

       4
         Adoptive Parents further argue that Putative Father’s consent to the adoption was also irrevocably implied
       because he failed to file a motion to contest the adoption within thirty days of service of the notice of
       adoption. However, because we have concluded that Putative Father’s consent to the adoption was
       irrevocably implied because he failed to timely register with the Registry, thereby precluding him from
       establishing paternity, we need not address this issue.

       Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 23A-AD-1590| March 6, 2024                                Page 18 of 18