Thanks for posting that.
I note that the terminology used on the form was “date received by local registrar” and “date accepted by state.”
In light of that, although we don’t have enough information to conclude anything definitive, I think the most likely explanation is the one offered by El Gato above, that the formulation used by the state agency was probably changed sometime in the 2000s from “date accepted” to “date filed” on COLBs issued by Hawaii.
Perhaps they changed the language to try to minimize the possibility of someone claiming that the “accepted” language means that the state vetted and assumes some kind of responsibility in the case of birth registrations made on the basis of fraudulent underlying documents. I don’t know.
But as I say, we don’t have enough information to make any conclusions and there might be another explanation for the “date filed” vs “date accepted” discrepancy.
Wish we had a recent COLB for a Nordyke twin to compare.
Thanks for being willing to post your information for this purpose. And Happy Birthday!
BTW, happy birthday coming up. Mine is Auguist 5, so it is looming also.
Sure thing. I wish it could help.
And Thanks for the birthday wishes!