In Re: Desamour
This text of In Re: Desamour (In Re: Desamour) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinions of the United 2005 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
5-27-2005
In Re: Desamour Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 05-1666
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005
Recommended Citation "In Re: Desamour " (2005). 2005 Decisions. Paper 1119. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2005/1119
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2005 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. HPS-63 (March 2005) NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
NO. 05-1666 ________________
IN RE: REYNOLDO DESAMOUR, Petitioner ____________________________________
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Crim. No. 89-cr-00389-6) _____________________________________
Submitted Under Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. March 11, 2005 Before: CHIEF JUDGE SCIRICA, WEIS AND GARTH, CIRCUIT JUDGES
Filed: May 27, 2005
_______________________
OPINION _______________________
PER CURIAM.
Reynoldo Desamour has filed a mandamus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1651, seeking to compel the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to
rule on his motion filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). It appears that the District
Court has recently entered an order disposing of his Rule 60 motion. Accordingly, the
petition for a writ of mandamus will be denied as moot. Desamour may, of course, challenge the District Court’s disposition of his Rule 60(b) motion by filing a timely
notice of appeal in accordance with the dictates of Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of
Appellate Procedure.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re: Desamour, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-desamour-ca3-2005.