Coppedge et al v. Conway et al

Filing 23

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Gregory M. Sleet on 4/15/15. (etg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
JAMES COPPEDGE and
KRISHA JOHNSON COPPEDGE,
Plaintiffs,
v.

DANIEL T. CONWAY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
) Civ. No. 14-1477-GMS
)
)
)
)

MEMORANDUM
I.

Background

The plaintiffs James Coppedge ("J. Coppedge") and Krisha Johnson Coppedge ("K.
Coppedge) (together "the plaintiffs") filed this action as a "Notice of Appeal" from a final order
of the Supreme Court of Delaware to the Controller of Currency, U.S. Treasury Department, the
Justice Department, and the U.S. District Court of Delaware. (D.I. 1.) On January 12, 2015, the
court denied the plaintiffs' motion to stay/injunction and dismissed the complaint for want of
subject matter jurisdiction. (See D.I. 6, 7.) The plaintiff then filed an amended complaint and a
motion for reconsideration. (D.I. 9, 10.) On February 5, 2015, the court denied the plaintiffs'
motion for reconsideration. (D.I. 17.)
II.

Discussion

Before the court are the defendants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and the
plaintiffs' motion for an extension of time to file an appeal, motion to quash the defendants'
motion to dismiss, and motion to dismiss appellees' claim of right to mortgage foreclosure due to
fraud. (D.I. 18, 19, 20, 21.)

The court will grant the motion to dismiss the amended complaint. (D .I. 18.) This matter
was dismissed for want of jurisdiction and the court did not give the plaintiffs leave to amend.
Further, the amended complaint was filed in derogation of Fed R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). In addition,
the court will deny the plaintiffs' motion to quash the defendants' motion to dismiss. (D.I. 20.)
On February 19, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a motion for an extension oftime to file an
appeal of the court's February 5, 2015 order pending an outcome of a report and/or decision
from the regulating agencies for ASC and RTS. (D.1. 19.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 4(a)(5)(A), the Court may grant the plaintiffs' motion only if it was filed no later than
thirty (30) days after the expiration of the time originally prescribed by Rule 4(a)(l), and they
show either excusable neglect or good cause.
The plaintiffs seek an extension oftime to appeal the February 5, 2015 order. The
plaintiffs indicate that they need to wait for the decision of regulating agencies as to whether the
defendants will concede and withdraw their alleged claims and issue a certificate of debt
discharge to release two liens on the title against the property at issue. The plaintiffs do not
indicate when they expect the regulating agencies' decision(s).
As to the time requirement, the court issued its order denying the plaintiffs' motion for
reconsideration on February 5, 2015. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require that a
notice of appeal in a civil case be filed within 30 days after the order appealed from is entered on
the district court's docket. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(l)(A). Here, the order denying the
plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration was entered February 5, 2015. Pursuant to the Rule, they
were required to file the motion for an extension of time to appeal the order no later than March
9, 2015. The plaintiffs' motion for an extension of time to file an appeal was timely under Rule
4(a)(5).
2

The court must also determine whether the plaintiffs have demonstrated excusable
neglect or good cause. Factors to consider in determining whether excusable neglect exists
include: "(1) the danger of prejudice to the [nonmovant]; (2) the length of the delay and its
potential impact on judicial proceedings; (3) the reason for the delay, including whether it was
within the reasonable control of the movant; and (4) whether the movant acted in good faith. In
re Diet Drugs Product Liability Litigation, 401F.3d143, 153-54 (3d Cir. 2005) (citing Pioneer
Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P 'ship, 507 U.S. 380, 395-97 (1993)). As for

determining if there is good cause to grant an extension, the "good cause standard applies in
situations in which there is no fault - excusable or otherwise. In such situations, the need for an
extension is usually occasioned by something that is not within the control of the movant." Fed.
R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(ii) advisory committee's note (2002 amendments).

In this case, the plaintiffs seek an extension of time because they are awaiting the
outcome of a report or decision from regulating agencies. The plaintiffs proceed pro se and
appear to be under the impression that any such rulings will have an effect on the outcome of this
case. Given the plaintiffs' prose status and turning to Rule 4(a)(5)(A)(ii), the court concludes
that there is good cause for granting an extension. More specifically, the plaintiffs made a good
faith effort in filing the motion without delay. In addition, denying the motion would produce a
harsh result for the plaintiffs. Therefore, the Court will grant the motion for an extension of time
to file a notice of appeal.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(C), "[n]o extension under this Rule 4(a)(5) may
exceed 30 days after the prescribed time or 14 days after the date when the order granting the
motion is entered, whichever is later." Here, because the later period of time is 14 days after the

3

date of this order granting the motion, the court will enlarge the time to file a notice of appeal for
14 days beyond the date of the entry of this order.
The court will deny as moot the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the appellees claim or right
to mortgage foreclosure due to fraud. (D.I. 21.)

III.

Conclusion
For the above reasons, the court will: (1) grant the defendants' motion to dismiss the

amended complaint (D.I. 18); (2) grant the plaintiffs' motion for an extension of time to file an
appeal (D .I. 19); (3) deny the plaintiffs' motion to quash the defendants' motion to dismiss (D .I.
20); and deny as moot the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss appellees' claim of right to mortgage
foreclosure due to fraud (D.I. 21.)
An appropriate order will be issued.

~,:/

1S

,201s

wiJngton, Delaware

4