USA v. Sean Moffitt
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| SEAN MOFFITT |
| 22-2736 |
| September 20, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit |
| Prisoner Petition-Vacate Sentence |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 17, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 MOTION filed by Appellant Sean Moffitt for Certificate of Appealability. Certificate of Service dated 11/10/2022. Service made by US mail. (ARR) [Entered: 11/17/2022 04:55 PM] |
| Filing 7 LEGAL DIVISION LETTER SENT advising that the case will be submitted to a panel of this Court for a decision on the issuance of certificate of appealability. (NF) [Entered: 11/10/2022 04:39 PM] |
Filing 6
COPY OF TEXT ONLY ORDER OF DISTRICT COURT signed by District Court Judge Cathy Bissoon, dated October 5, 2022, denying Certificate of Appealability as to SEAN MOFFITT re 338 Notice of Appeal - Interlocutory. On September 29, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an Order (Doc. 340) directing this Court either to issue a Certificate of Appealability or to state reasons why a Certificate of Appealability should not issue in connection with the Court's August 31, 2022 Order (Doc. 336) denying Mr. Moffitt's "Motion to Reopen Original Habeas Petition in Accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)" (Doc. 327), which Mr. Moffitt has appealed. In accordance with the directive of the Court of Appeals, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue because jurists of reason would not find the Court's conclusions, as set forth in its August 31, 2022 Order (Doc. 336), debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). Signed by Judge Cathy Bissoon on 10/5/2022. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (ARR) [Entered: 11/08/2022 12:54 PM]
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER (Clerk) remanding appeal to District Court for the purpose of either issuance of a certificate of appealability or a statement of reasons why one should not issue. The appeal is STAYED pending determination by the District Court. (ARR) [Entered: 09/29/2022 05:05 PM]
|
| Filing 4 ECF FILER: Motion filed by Appellee USA to summarily affirm. Certificate of Service dated 09/29/2022. Service made by US mail, ECF. [22-2736] (LSI) [Entered: 09/29/2022 01:43 PM] |
| Filing 3 ECF FILER: ENTRY OF APPEARANCE from Laura Schleich Irwin on behalf of Appellee(s) United States of America. [22-2736] (LSI) [Entered: 09/22/2022 10:37 AM] |
| Filing 2 RECORD available on District Court CM/ECF. (ARR) [Entered: 09/20/2022 04:27 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL CASE DOCKETED. Notice filed by Appellant Sean Moffitt in District Court No. 2-12-cr-00147-002. (ARR) [Entered: 09/20/2022 04:22 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: USA v. Sean Moffitt | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | Laura S. Irwin Esq. |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellant: SEAN MOFFITT | |
| Represented By: | Sean Moffitt |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
