UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. $4,826.80 UNITED STATES CURRENCY

Filing 40

ORDER denying 36 Caldwell's Motion - Because Caldwell's motion for file a belated appeal is untimely, this Court is without authority to reopen the time to appeal. See Tinsley v. City of Indianapolis, 92 F.3d 1187, 1996 WL 417562 (7th Cir. 1996) (unpublished opinion). For these reasons the motion for belated appeal [dkt. 36] is DENIED. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/16/2014. (copy to Steven Caldwell via US Mail) (JKS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
) Case No. 1:11-cv-0672-JMS-DML
)
$4,826.80 UNITED STATES CURRENCY,
)
)
Defendant,
)
__________________________________________)
)
STEVEN CALDWELL,
)
)
Interested Party.
)

Entry Denying Motion for Return of Property
The movant Steven Caldwell filed a motion for return of property that asks this Court to
grant him a belated notice of appeal to appeal the entry of a default judgment that was entered in
2012. His motion is denied [dkt. 36]. Rule 4(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
requires that a notice of appeal in a civil case in which the United States is a party be filed in the
district court within 60 days of the entry of the judgment or order appealed. A default judgment
was entered in this case on July 13, 2012, (dkt. 34), and movant Steven Caldwell had until
September 11, 2012, to file his notice of appeal. Here, in 2012, Caldwell failed to report his current
address to the Court, and as a result, the Court concluded that he abandoned his claim to the
defendant currency (dkts. 26, 27, 28). A default judgment was entered on July 13, 2012 (dkts. 33,
34).
Pursuant to Rule 4(a)(5) of Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure the district court may
extend the time to file a notice of appeal if the motion for extension of time is filed no later than

30 days after the time prescribed by Rule 4(a) expires and the moving party shows excusable
neglect or good cause. No extension under 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.
Because Caldwell missed his Rule 4(a) deadline by almost two (2) years, he has exceeded the
thirty (30) day window available under Rule 4(a)(5).
Rule 4(a)(6) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure is also of no use to Caldwell.
This Rule allows the district court to reopen the time to file an appeal for a period of 14 days after
the date when its order to reopen is entered, but only if the motion to reopen is filed within 180
days after the judgment or order is entered or within 7 days after the moving party receives notice
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d) of the entry, whichever is earlier.
Caldwell does not provide any information in his motion for return of property as to when
he received notice of the entry of the default judgment; however, this Court specifically found that
Caldwell abandoned his claim for failing to report his current address to the Court. Thus, he can
find no refuge in Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) or Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
77(d).
Because Caldwell’s motion for file a belated appeal is untimely, this Court is without
authority to reopen the time to appeal. See Tinsley v. City of Indianapolis, 92 F.3d 1187, 1996 WL
417562 (7th Cir. 1996) (unpublished opinion). For these reasons the motion for belated appeal
[dkt. 36] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

9/16/2014
Date:___________

_______________________________
Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:
Steven Caldwell, #978529
Plainfield Correctional Facility
Inmate Mail/Parcels
727 Moon Road
Plainfield, Indiana 46168

Electronically registered counsel.