Williams v. United States Of America
ORDER dismissing 40 Rule 60(b)(6)(4) Motion; denying 15 Motion for status of Rule 60b motion; denying 16 Motion for Retroactive reduction; denying 19 Motion for reduction under 3582; denying 24 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 8/31/17. (loh)
u.S. DISTRICT COURT
Southern District of6A
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
Filed In Office
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
FRANKLIN L. WILLIAMS,
CASE NO. CV514-062
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
(Doc. 15), Motion for Retroactive Reduction (Doc. 16), Motion
for Reduction (Doc. 19), Motion to Compel Judgment (Doc. 24)
and Rule 60(b) Motion (Doc. 40).
Petitioner's Motion for Rule 60(b) is in fact an attaclc
on "the federal court's previous resolution of a claim on the
merits." Peters v. United States,
, 2017 WL
443631, *1 (11th Cir. 2017). As a result Petitioner's motion
motion. Because the motion is successive. Petitioner "needed
to obtain an order from this Court authorizing the district
court to consider the motion." Id. at *2. Because Petitioner
Petitioner's Motion for Rule 60(b) is DISMISSED. After careful
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?