CRAFT v. BONDS et al
MEMORANDUM ORDER Denying the 12 request for an extension of time to file an IFP Application. Signed by Judge Peter G. Sheridan on 10/3/2017. (km)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Civil Action No. 17-122 1 (PGS)
WILLIE BONDS, et al.,
This matter has come before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus of
Petitioner Nathan Craft, for relief under 28 U.S.C.
2254. The Court dismissed the Petition.
ECF No. 9. Thereafter, Petitioner appealed the dismissal. ECF No. 10. Presently before the
Court is Petitioner’s motion for extension of time to file an
forma pauper/s (“IFP”) application
for the purposes of his appeal. ECF No. 12.
However, Petitioner cites to no authority stating that this Court may grant extensions to
file an IFP application for the purposes of appeal.
Under the Third Circuit Local Appellate
Rules, Petitioner has 14 days to file an IFP application or risk dismissal of his appeal. See 3d
L.A.R. 3.3 & L.A.R. Misc. 107.0. The Court is unaware of any authority that grants a district
court the ability to extend deadlines set by the Third Circuit on filings within an appeal after a
notice of appeal has been filed.
While Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure authorizes this
Court to entertain an IFP motion for the purposes of appeal. see Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(1). it does
not state that the Court can extend the time to file such an motion. Absent an express grant of
authority, this Court is powerless to manage the Third Circuit’s docket. If Petitioner wishes to
obtain an extension, he must make his request directly to the Third Circuit.
iT IS therefore on this
ORDERED that the request for extension of time to file an IFP application. ECF No. 12,
is hereby DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that that the Clerk shall serve this Order upon Petitioner by regular mail.
Peter G. Sheridan, 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?