Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-02169/USCOURTS-casd-3_05-cv-02169-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 05cv2169 BTM(PCL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANSELMO A PEDROZA,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 05cv2169 BTM(PCL)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

VACATE JUDGMENT AND/OR

REOPEN TIME TO FILE AN

APPEAL

vs.

JAMES E. TILTON, Secretary,

Defendant.

 On February 17, 2009, the Court received Petitioner’s “Motion for Relief From

Judgment or Order Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6).” Upon review of

Petitioner’s motion, it is apparent that Petitioner is actually seeking to reopen the time to file

an appeal. Petitioner argues that his Notice of Appeal (filed concurrently with the instant

motion) should be deemed timely because he never received notice of the Court’s order

denying his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus or the Clerk’s Judgment until he received a

copy of the order and a copy of the docket on January 30, 2009. 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6) provides the exclusive means for extending the time to appeal

due to failure to learn that judgment has been entered. In re Stein, 197 F.3d 421, 425 (9th

Cir. 1999). A party cannot rely on Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) to circumvent the deadlines imposed

by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). Id.

Under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6)(B), a motion to reopen must be filed “within 180 days

after the judgment or order is entered or within 7 days after the moving party receives notice

Case 3:05-cv-02169-BTM-PCL Document 36 Filed 03/03/09 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2 05cv2169 BTM(PCL)

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d) of the entry, whichever is earlier.” (Emphasis

added.) The 180-day period establishes an outer limit beyond which no relief may be

granted. Stein, 197 F.3d at 425. Rule 4(a)(6) “makes it clear that parties are expected to

energize themselves, and to discover the entry, with or without notice.” Id. 

In this case, the Court’s order denying the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was

entered on June 12, 2007. The Clerk’s Judgment was entered that same day. (Petitioner

erroneously claims that no separate judgment was entered.) 

Petitioner’s motion to reopen was filed well beyond 180 days after the entry of

judgment. Therefore, Petitioner’s motion to vacate the judgment and/or reopen the time to

file an appeal is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: March 3, 2009

Honorable Barry Ted Moskowitz

United States District Judge

Case 3:05-cv-02169-BTM-PCL Document 36 Filed 03/03/09 Page 2 of 2