UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE D.C. CIRCUIT


COLON, ALBERTO O.

v.

DOS


98-5179a

D.C. Cir. 1999


*	*	*


J U D G M E N T


This cause came to be heard on appeal from an opinion and  judgment of
the United States District Court for the District  of Columbia, Lozada
Colon v. U.S. Dep't of State, 2 F. Supp.  2d 43 (D.D.C. 1998), and was
briefed by counsel. The issues  have been accorded full consideration
by the Court, and it is


ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment of the  District Court, denying
plaintiff's request for mandamus re- lief, be affirmed. We agree with
the District Court that  mandamus relief is inappropriate here,
because 8 U.S.C.  s 1501 clearly affords the Secretary discretion to
determine  whether a Certificate of Loss of Nationality should be
issued.  See 13th Regional Corp. v. U.S. Dep't of Interior, 654 F.2d 
758, 760 (D.C. Cir. 1980) ("[M]andamus will issue 'only where  the
duty to be performed is ministerial and the obligation to  act
peremptory, and plainly defined. The law must not only  authorize the
demanded action, but require it; the duty must  be clear and
indisputable.' ") (quoting United States ex rel.  McLennan v. Wilbur,
283 U.S. 414, 420 (1931)); accord  Heckler v. Ringer, 466 U.S. 602,
616 (1984) (mandamus is only  appropriate if "the defendant owes [the
plaintiff] a clear  nondiscretionary duty"). We also find no merit in
plaintiff's  equal protection claims, raised for the first time on


In affirming, we find it unnecessary to decide whether the  plaintiff,
Lozada Colon, failed to show that there was no other  remedy, save
mandamus, available to persons denied a Certif- icate of Loss of
Nationality. Accordingly, we do not address  any issues concerning the
availability of judicial review for  persons denied a Certificate of
Loss of Nationality, nor do we  affirm any of the District Court's
views on this matter.  Matters regarding the availability of review,
outside of man- damus, can be decided another day in a case properly
raising  these issues.


The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate  herein until
seven days after disposition of any timely petition  for rehearing or
petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.  App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir.
R. 41.


Per Curiam