Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

06-1608 - Porter v. Hudson

Download Files


Document in Context
06-1608 - Porter v. Hudson
July 16, 2007
PDF | More
Order For the reasons set forth in this Order, Respondent Hudson's Motion to Dismiss, re 7, is GRANTED and this case is hereby DISMISSED. Signed by Judge Kathleen M. O'Malley on 7/16/07.(R,Sh) Modified text on 7/17/2007 (B, B).
May 19, 2008
PDF | More
Order On October 24, 2007, Michael Porter (Petitioner) filed a notice of appeal (Doc. 25) from the Courts July 16, 2007 order (Doc. 23), and its judgment entry of the same date (Doc. 24). That filing was late. With his notice of appeal, however, Petitioner also filed a Motion for Leave to File Notice of Appeal and For Service of Judgment Entry (Doc. 26). The Courts November 8, 2007 order granted Petitioners request for service of the entry of judgment in this matter, but denied his request to file his notice of appeal. Though it was unclear under which rule the petitioners motion was raised, because the motion was filed outside the time for filing a motion for an extension of time to file an appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5), the Court treated the motion as a request to reopen the appeal period under Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). The Court, however, found that service was properly effectuated and, therefore, decided that Petitioners motion was on 5/19/08. Related document 30. (K,K)not well-taken. See Fed R. App. Proc. 4(a)(6)(A). Thus, The Courts non-document entry of November 8, 2007 resolved what this Court construed as a motion to reopen an appeal under Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6).Signed by Judge Kathleen M. O'Malley