** THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED DECISION THAT CANNOT BE CITED **
Executive Office for Immigration Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Micaela A. Guthrie
Assistant Chief Counsel
The respondent’s timely motion to reconsider the Board’s October 30, 2009, will be denied. See Matter of O-S-G-, 24 I&N Dec. 56 (BIA 2006); section 240(c)(6) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(6); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(b). In our previous order, we dismissed the respondent’s appeal from the Immigration Judge’s decision denying the respondent motion to terminate the proceedings based on a claim to United States citizenship. The respondent now specifically claims that the Board failed to make a determination that he is a “national” of the United States based upon service in U.S. Army and oaths of allegiance to the United States. See Motion to Reconsider at 5-6. Service in the armed forces of the United States and taking the standard military oath does not make a person a national, however. Warmington v. Keisler, 254 Fed. Appx. 287, 289 (5th Cir. 2007), citing Reyes-Alcaraz v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 937, 938-40 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that service in the armed forces of the United States, along with the taking of the standard military oath, does not alter an alien’s status to that of a “national” within the meaning of the Act). Accordingly, the respondent’s motion to reconsider is denied. [FN1]
David B. Holmes
FOR THE BOARD
FN1. The respondent’s request to stay removal is also denied.