Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
5
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 1 of 13
:
RAYMOND DUNCAN, :
: Civil No. 07-1494 (RMB)
Petitioner, :
:
v. :
: OPINION
CHARLES SAMUELS, JR., :
:
Respondent. :
:
APPEARANCES:
1
Duncan’s motion is dated April 10, 2007, but was not
received by the Court until April 27, 2007. The Court finds that
Duncan “filed” his motion on the date he handed it to prison
officials to be mailed to the Court for filing. See Houston v.
Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988); Burns v. Morton, 134 F.3d 109,
113 (3d Cir. 1998)(incorporating the “mailbox rule” for habeas
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 2 of 13
I. BACKGROUND
bringing this action in federal court. Duncan did not show that
2
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 3 of 13
this Court to review. This Court further found that Duncan had
Mandamus Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1361, because Duncan had not filed the
3
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 4 of 13
removal from the United States or that he had been noticed for
Prison Camp.
Next, Duncan argues that this Court does have subject matter
4
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 5 of 13
v. I.N.S., 232 F.3d 328, 337 (2d Cir. 2000)(“Article III courts
II. ANALYSIS
935 F. Supp. 513, 515 (D.N.J. 1996). The standard for reargument
United States v. Jones, 158 F.R.D. 309, 314 (D.N.J. 1994). The
5
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 6 of 13
of new evidence that was not available when the court [issued its
Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 1999)(citing N. River Ins.
Co. v. CIGNA Reinsurance Co., 52 F.3d 1194, 1218 (3d Cir. 1995)).
The Court will grant a motion for reconsideration only where its
but not considered by, the court in the course of making the
878 (D.N.J.), aff’d, 891 F.2d 283 (3d Cir. 1989). Thus,
and Casino, Inc., 830 F. Supp. 826, 831 & n.3 (D.N.J. 1992);
Egloff v. New Jersey Air National Guard, 684 F. Supp. 1275, 1279
6
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 7 of 13
reject new evidence which was not presented when the court made
U.S.A., Inc., 680 F. Supp. 159, 162 (D.N.J. 1988); see also
7
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 8 of 13
from his petition, which this Court did not consider. Namely,
came to the U.S. and that he was in the care and custody of his
389 F.3d 207, 208-10 (1st Cir. 2004)(holding that alien cannot
INS, No.Civ.A. 04-1001, 2005 WL 452371 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 23, 2005).
3
Under 8 C.F.R. §§ 316.10 and 316.11, a applicant for
naturalization must demonstrate good moral character and that he
or she is law abiding.
8
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 9 of 13
removal from the United States, the district court does not have
1263-64 (9th Cir. 2001); Hughes v. Ashcroft, 255 F.3d 752, 755
proceedings).
4
If no genuine issue of material fact about the
petitioner’s nationality is presented, then the court of appeals
shall decide the nationality claim. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(5)(A).
If there exists a genuine issue of material fact concerning the
nationality claim, then the court of appeals shall transfer the
proceeding to the district court for a new hearing on the
nationality claim. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(5)(B).
9
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 10 of 13
F.3d 884, 892 (3d Cir. 1994)(“a federal district court does not
Uhl, 239 U.S. 3 (1915). Finally, the REAL ID Act of 2005, Pub.
L. No. 109-13, 119 Stat. 231 (May 11, 2005) has stripped the
10
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 11 of 13
This Court last notes Duncan’s newly asserted claim that his
461 U.S. 238, 245 (1983); Meachum v. Fano, 427 U.S. 215, 224-25
11
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 12 of 13
certain criteria are met); Walker v. Hughes, 558 F.2d 1247, 1252
extent that Duncan complains that his alien status limits his
a transfer or placement.
12
Case 1:07-cv-01494-RMB Document 5 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 13 of 13
III. CONCLUSION
13