JACOBSON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Esther Salas on 3/3/2014. (nr, )
*NOT FOR PUBLICATION*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Civil Action No. 12-1258 (ES)
THE COURT having issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order on April 5, 2013
dismissing Petitioner’s petition for a writ of coram nobis with prejudice; and
IT APPEARING that on August 29, 2013, Petitioner filed a pro se1 motion requesting that
this Court “re-issue” its September 4, 2012 decision so that Petitioner’s thirty-day appeal period
will re-start (D.E. No. 9)2; and Petitioner arguing that, although his counsel informed the Court of
counsel’s new address (D.E. No. 7), counsel failed to inform Petitioner and, as a result, Petitioner
did not receive a copy of the Court’s April 5, 2013 decision (D.E. No. 8) denying the petition; and
Petitioner further arguing that the time period within which he could file an appeal of the Court’s
April 5th Opinion and Order has now since expired and he therefore requests that the Court
“re-issue” its decision; and
According to the docket, Petitioner is still represented by counsel. However, based on
information contained in Petitioner’s motion, it appears that he is no longer represented. (D.E.
No. 9 at 4).
Although Petitioner states that he would like the Court to re-issue its September 4, 2012 Order, it
appears that he actually meant the April 5, 2013 Opinion and Order. The September 4th Order
only administratively terminated the case due to Petitioner’s failure to provide a current mailing
address and that order was effectively withdrawn when the Court entered its April 5th Opinion and
Order re-opening the case and addressing the petition on its merits. (See D.E. Nos. 3 & 8).
THE COURT finding that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) provides that, when
a party does not receive notice of a judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
77(d), the district court may reopen the time to file an appeal if a motion to reopen is filed within
180 days after the judgment is entered, or within fourteen days after the party receives notice,
whichever is earlier, see Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 208-09 (2007); and
THE COURT further finding that Petitioner states that he received a copy of the Opinion
and Order denying his petition on June 10, 2013 (D.E. No. 9 at 4); however, Petitioner did not file
his motion seeking to re-open the time to file an appeal until August 29, 2013—well beyond the
fourteen-day time period permitted by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6); and the Court
having considered the matter without oral argument pursuant to Rule 78(b) and Local Civil Rule
7.1(i); and for good cause appearing, Petitioner’s motion is DENIED; the Court will issue an
Esther Salas, U.S.D.J.
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?