Koch v. Schapiro
This text of Koch v. Schapiro (Koch v. Schapiro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
__________________________________________ ) RANDOLPH S. KOCH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 12-0301 (PLF) ) MARY L. SCHAPIRO, ) Chair, Securities and Exchange ) Commission, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The court of appeals remanded this case for the Court to “determine whether,
based on appellant’s response to the order to show cause and the attachments thereto, the notice
of appeal was in fact timely filed.” The Court concludes that it was.
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this matter. His response to the order to show
cause and its attachments sufficiently demonstrate that plaintiff’s notice of appeal was timely
filed on August 11, 2014. It was hand-delivered to the courthouse that day after the Clerk’s
Office had closed. Plaintiff’s courier, however, apparently neglected to time-stamp the notice of
appeal. Because the notice of appeal was filed after-hours, the lack of a time-stamp caused the
District Court’s Clerk’s Office to enter the notice of appeal on August 12, 2014. It is therefore
hereby
ORDERED that plaintiff’s notice of appeal be considered timely filed; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court is directed to transmit to the
court of appeals a copy of this order.
SO ORDERED.
/s/_______________________________ PAUL L. FRIEDMAN DATE: January 30, 2015 United States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Koch v. Schapiro, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koch-v-schapiro-dcd-2015.