In Re SGROMO
This text of In Re SGROMO (In Re SGROMO) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 20-108 Document: 6 Page: 1 Filed: 01/31/2020
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
In re: PIETRO PASQUALE ANTONIO SGROMO, Petitioner ______________________
2020-108 ______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in No. 2:19- cv-00068-RSP, Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. ______________________
ON PETITION ______________________
PER CURIAM. ORDER Pietro Pasquale Antonio Sgromo petitions for a writ of mandamus to compel the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to reverse its dismissal of the case and grant injunctive and other relief. Mr. Sgromo filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Texas, alleging, inter alia, infringement of two patents. On September 13, 2019, the district court entered judgment dismissing the case. On September 23, 2019, Mr. Sgromo moved for reconsideration and to alter the judgment. On September 27, 2019, the district court denied those Case: 20-108 Document: 6 Page: 2 Filed: 01/31/2020
2 IN RE: SGROMO
requests. On October 13, 2019, Mr. Sgromo filed this peti- tion for writ of mandamus in the district court. Mandamus is not available to Mr. Sgromo because he could have obtained review of the district court’s decisions through direct appeal. See In re Pollitz, 206 U.S. 323, 331 (1907) (“[M]andamus cannot . . . be used to perform the of- fice of an appeal.”). However, we may construe a petition as a notice of appeal if filed within the filing deadline. Those are the circumstances here. We therefore construe the petition as a timely notice of appeal and direct the clerk to docket the appeal in the usual course. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for writ of mandamus is denied because the matter is treated as a timely notice of appeal. The clerk is directed to docket the case as an appeal. FOR THE COURT
January 31, 2020 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
s28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re SGROMO, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sgromo-cafc-2020.