William Kaetz v. United States

Opinion

NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________

No. 23-2114 ___________

WILLIAM F. KAETZ, Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; RENÉE MARIE BUMB, Chief United States District Judge New Jersey District Court, Trenton Vicinage ____________________________________

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 1-23-cv-02741) District Judge: Honorable Juan R. Sánchez ____________________________________

Submitted on Appellees’ Motion for Summary Affirmance Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 September 12, 2024 Before: JORDAN, PORTER, and PHIPPS, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: October 1, 2024) _________

OPINION* _________

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.

Appellees’ motion for summary affirmance is granted, and we will summarily

affirm the District Court’s order dismissing William Kaetz’s complaint. The reasons for

our ruling are explained by separate opinion issued in Kaetz v. United States, C.A. No.

23-2322. Kaetz’s motion to withdraw the motion for judicial notice that he filed at

Appeal Docket No. 18 is granted. Kaetz’s corrected motion for judicial notice is granted

to the extent that we have considered the arguments raised therein in resolving this

appeal. To the extent that any of Kaetz’s submissions on appeal can be construed to

request any other relief, such relief is denied.