Arnold v. USA

Filing 41

ORDER denying 40 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 06/24/2015. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(jlk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:10-CV-00453-RJC
CURTIS ARNOLD
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon Petitioner’s pro se letter “in lieu of a formal
motion,” (Doc. No. 40), for reconsideration of the Order, (Doc. No. 34), dismissing his motion,
(Doc. No. 1), and counsel’s supplemental motion, (Doc. No. 15), to vacate filed pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2255.
Petitioner submitted a pro se notice of appeal dated May 28, 2015, which was filed on
June 2, 2015. (Doc. No. 37). He dated the instant motion June 1, 2015, which was filed on June
17, 2015. (Doc. No. 40). He does not specify a legal basis for relief; therefore, it is difficult to
ascertain whether the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the motion. See Griggs v. Provident
Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) (per curiam) (the filing of a notice of appeal divests
district court of jurisdiction as a general rule); but see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4) (listing the effect
of particular motions on notice of appeal). In an abundance of caution, the Court will rule on the
merits of Petitioner’s motion.
Petitioner complains that he was deprived of the opportunity to respond to the
Government’s motion to dismiss, (Doc. No. 33), because he did not personally receive a copy of
the motion. (Doc. No. 40: Motion at 1). However, Petitioner had previously requested
appointment of counsel, (Doc. Nos. 10, 18), and appointed counsel appeared on his behalf, (Doc.

1

Nos. 13, 17: Notices). The government complied with Fed. R. Civ. 5(b)(1) by serving a copy of
the motion to dismiss upon counsel, (Doc. No. 33 at 8); thus, Petitioner’s allegation does not
provide cause to reconsider the Order resolving his motion to vacate.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, (Doc.
No. 40), is DENIED.
Signed: June 24, 2015

2