Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

KOCH v. SCHAPIRO, 12-0301 (PLF). (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Columbia Number: infdco20150202676 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jan. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge. 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 Au
More

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.

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.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer