Scott v. Carlson

Filing 57

ORDER Granting the 31 MOTION for Extension of Time to file Appeal filed by Lynn Eugene Scott, Case reopened, by Judge William J. Martinez on 8/5/2014. (evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 13-cv-0069-WJM-KMT
LYNN EUGENE SCOTT,
Plaintiff,
v.
MARY CARLSON,
Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REOPEN TIME TO FILE APPEAL

Plaintiff Lynn Eugene Scott brought this case pro se against Defendant Mary
Carlson, in her individual capacity, claiming violations of his Fifth, Eighth, and
Fourteenth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) On February 7,
2014, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and entered judgment in favor
of Defendant. (ECF Nos. 28 & 29.) The copy of the Judgment that was mailed to
Plaintiff was returned undeliverable. (ECF No. 30.)
On April 28, 2014, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Reopen Time to File Appeal
(“Motion”). (ECF No. 31.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6),
Plaintiff asks the Court to reopen the time for him to file an appeal because he did not
receive notice of the entry of judgment in this case. (Id. at 2.) Plaintiff
contemporaneously filed a Notice of Appeal. (ECF No. 33.) The Tenth Circuit abated
his case pending ruling on the instant Motion. (ECF No. 38.)

The day after the Motion was filed, the Court referred the Motion to Magistrate
Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya. (ECF No. 35.) On June 13, 2014, Judge Tafoya found that
the requirements of Rule 4(a)(6) had been satisfied, and granted the Motion. (ECF No.
51.) On July 8, 2014, the Tenth Circuit issued an order stating: “Although the
magistrate judge has issued an order granting the motion [to reopen the time for
appeal], a magistrate judge is not empowered to definitively rule on a Rule 4(a)(6)
motion to reopen.” (ECF No. 55.) The Tenth Circuit partially remanded the case to this
Court “for a final ruling on the pending Rule 4(a)(6) motion.” (Id.)
The Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and finds that it was
thorough and sound. The Court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning,
and finds that the requirements of Rule 4(a)(6) are met.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen Time to
File Appeal (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED.
Dated this 5th day of August, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

William J. Martínez
United States District Judge

2