Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-00029/USCOURTS-azd-2_14-cv-00029-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

David Tomasello, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Arizona, State of, et al., 

Defendants.

No. CV-14-00029-PHX-NVW

ORDER 

 Before the Court is the Court of Appeals’ Order (Doc. 36) directing this Court to 

construe Petitioners Reply to Order Dated April 14, 2014 (Doc. 28) as a timely request to 

reopen the time to appeal pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). 

 This Court ordered the Clerk to enter judgment in Plaintiff’s suit on April 14, 

2014. On May 19, 2014, Plaintiff informed the Court that he had not received notice of 

the entry of judgment until May 16, 2014. Plaintiff filed a formal notice of appeal on 

July 11, 2014, after more than the thirty days for filing an appeal permitted by Federal 

Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A). Per the Court of Appeals’ instruction, this Court 

treats Plaintiff’s May 19, 2014, submission as a timely request to reopen the time to 

appeal. Under Rule 4(a)(6), the district court may reopen the time to file an appeal for a 

period of 14 days, “but only if all the following conditions are satisfied: (A) the court 

finds that the moving party did not receive notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

77(d) of the entry of the judgment or order sought to be appealed within 21 days after 

entry; (B) the motion is filed within 180 days after the judgment or order is entered or 

within 14 days after the moving party receives notice under Federal Rule of Civil 

Case 2:14-cv-00029-NVW Document 39 Filed 10/09/14 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

Procedure 77(d) of the entry, whichever is earlier; and (C) the court finds that no party 

would be prejudiced.” Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). 

 Throughout the course of this litigation, Plaintiff has received physical copies of 

many of the Court’s orders, yet on other occasions mail sent to Plaintiff has been returned 

as undeliverable. There is no readily apparent explanation for why some documents sent 

to Plaintiff’s address of record were received while others ostensibly were not. 

Concerned that Plaintiff may have been screening his mail to avoid certain 

correspondence, the Court on September 9, 2014, ordered Plaintiff to submit, by 

September 22, 2014, “copies of all written instructions or communications between him 

and the mailbox address” he provided to the Court, “including all communications 

concerning what address is sufficient to receive mail and what mail to reject.” Doc. 37. 

To date, Plaintiff has not responded to that order. Thus there is reason to question 

whether Plaintiff in fact never received notice that the Court had entered judgment 

against him. Nevertheless, giving Plaintiff the benefit of any possible doubt, it appears 

he has met the requirement of subpart (A) of Rule 4(a)(6). See United States v. Withers, 

638 F.3d 1055, 1061-62 (9th Cir. 2011) (finding rule’s first prong satisfied where the 

appellant “made an unchallenged assertion that he did not receive timely notice of 

judgment”). Plaintiff filed his Motion with the Court both within 14 days of receiving 

notice and within 180 days of the entry of judgment, as required by subpart (B). When 

“generously construed as ... a motion to reopen the time for filing an appeal,” id. at 1062, 

Plaintiff’s May 19, 2014, submission passes the test laid out in Rule 4(a)(6). 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Request to Reopen the Time to 

Appeal Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) (Doc. 28) is granted. 

 Dated this 9th day of October, 2014. 

Case 2:14-cv-00029-NVW Document 39 Filed 10/09/14 Page 2 of 2