Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Fa Lu Cioli LLC v. Laura Zuchowski, 15-3812 (2016)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Number: 15-3812 Visitors: 27
Filed: Jun. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _ No. 15-3812 _ FA.LU. CIOLI, Appellant v. LAURA ZUCHOWSKI, Director, Vermont Service Center; DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMLAND SECURITY; ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA _ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civ. No. 2-15-cv-01310) Honorable Stanley R. Chesler, District Judge _ Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ No. 15-3812 ______________ FA.LU. CIOLI, Appellant v. LAURA ZUCHOWSKI, Director, Vermont Service Center; DIRECTOR UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMLAND SECURITY; ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civ. No. 2-15-cv-01310) Honorable Stanley R. Chesler, District Judge ______________ Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) June 14, 2016 BEFORE: AMBRO, JORDAN, and GREENBERG, Circuit Judges ______________ JUDGMENT ORDER ______________ This matter comes on before this Court on an appeal from an order of the District Court entered on November 20, 2015, denying a motion for a preliminary injunction. While the appeal has been pending, the District Court on June 16, 2016, entered an order dismissing the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In the circumstances, even if we held that the District Court should not have denied the motion for the preliminary injunction we cannot remand the case to the District Court with instructions to enter the injunction because the case is no longer pending in that Court. Moreover, if we affirmed the denial of the motion for a preliminary injunction our order would have no consequence as the order affirming the denial would not compel the defendants to do anything. Consequently, the appeal is moot and therefore we dismiss appeal. The parties will bear their own costs on this appeal. By the Court, s/ Morton I. Greenberg Circuit Judge Attest: s/ Marcia M. Waldron Clerk DATED: June 30, 2016 2
Source:  CourtListener

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