2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 4-22-2005 

# J ohns t own v

. V or a P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 04-4699

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " J o hn s t own v

. V or a" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1323. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/1323A PS-192 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N O . 04- 4699

________________ C I T Y O F J O H N S T O WN v. CH ANDAN S . VOR A, A ppel l ant

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt Fort he W es t ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a (D . C . C i v. N o. 04 -cv- 00 22 1J) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e G us t ave D i amond

_______________________________________ S u b mi t t e d F o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l Un d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) M ar ch 31, 2005 BEFORE: SLOV I TER, NY GA AR D A ND FUEN TES, CI RCU I T J UD GES ( Fi l ed A pr i l 22, 2005 )

_______________________ OP I NI ON

_______________________ P E R C UR I AM C handan S. V or a appe al s t he Sept ember22, 2004 or derof the U ni t ed St at es D is tr ic t C o u rt f

o r t h e W e s te rn D is tr ic t o f P e n n s y lv a n ia d is m is s in g p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) her“Pet i t i on forR emoval ” forl ack of j ur i s di ct i on. V or a al s o appea l s t heW e cons t rue the not i ce of appea l as appea l i ng fr om the D i s t r i ctC our tdi s m i s s al 1 or derand fr om t he or der s deny i ng V or a’ s m ot i ons t o vaca t e. 2 O ct ober27, N ovember17, and D ece m ber17, 2004 or der s deny i ng herm ot i ons t o vaca t e. I n 2000, C handan V or a fi l ed a mot i on t o pr ocee d i n form a paupe r i s and a “ Pet i t i on f o r R e m o v a l,” o f

a P e n n sy lv a n ia m u n icip a l co u rt c rim in a l co m p lain t ch a rg in g V o ra w ith o b stru cti o n o f th e a d m inistrati v e law an d d isord erlyco n d u ct arisi n g o u t of V o ra’s in ter f e re n c e w ith P u b lic W o rk s’ e m p lo y e e s’ a ttem p t to c lea n u p h e r p ro p e rtyp u rsu a n t to a s t at e courtor der . O n Sept ember22, 2004, the D i s t r i ctC our tdi s m i s s ed the r emoval pet i t i on, concl udi ng t hatt he “Pet i t i on forR emoval ” s oughtt o att ack a s t at e courtcr i m i nal pr ocee di ng overw hi ch the D i s t r i ctC our thad no j ur i s di ct i on and thatthe pl eadi ngs fai l ed to sta te a c laim u p o n w h ich re lief c o u ld b e g ra n ted . O n O c to b e r 1 3 , 2 0 0 4 , V o ra m o v e d to vaca t e the di s m i s s al of herr emoval act i on, cl ai m i ng thatthe or di nance s thatform ed the bas i s forchar ges agai ns therw er e uncons t i tut i onal , and thatci t yoffi ci al s vi ol at ed her ci vil ri gh t s. B yorder ent ered O ct ob er 27, 20 04 , the D i stri ctC ou rttreat ed the m oti on as a r econs i der at i on m ot i on and deni ed i tforthe s ame r eas ons s etfor t h i n i t s or i gi nal di s m i s s al or der . D r . V or a fi l ed a t i m el ym ot i on t o vaca t e the O ct ober2004 or deron No v e mb e r8 , 2 0 0 4 , wh i c h t h e Di s t r i c tCo u r td e n i e d o n No v e mb e r1 7 , 2 0 0 4 o n th e s a me g ro u n d s it h a d d e n ied h e r re c o n sid e ra tio n m o tio n . V o ra f iled h e r th ird m o tio n to v a c a te o n N o v em b er 2 9 , 2 0 0 4 , w h ich th e D istri ct C o u rtd en ied o n D ec em b er 1 7 , 2 0 0 4 . V o ra fi l ed a not i ce of

appea l on D ece m ber16, 2004. 13

F irst, V o ra ’s n o tice o f

a p p e a l f ro m th e o rd e r d ism iss in g th e p e tit io n f o r re m o v a l is c le a rl yu n tim e ly u n d e r F e d . R . A p p . P . 4 (a )( 1 ), a s it w a s f ile d a lm o s t 2 m o n th s to o la te . T he t i m e- per i od pr es cr i bed forfi l i ng a not i ce of appea l i s “mandat oryand j ur i s di ct i onal . ” B r ow derv. D i r ect orof D ep’ tof C orr . , 434 U . S. 257, 264 ( 1978) . I n a ci vi l cas e i n w hi ch t he U ni t ed St at es i s nota part y , a not i ce of appea l m us tbe fi l ed w i t hi n t hi r t y( 30) day s of t h e d a t e o f

e n t r yo f t h e f i n a l j u d g me n to ro r d e ra p p e a l e d . F e d . R. Ap p . P . 4 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A) . On Sept ember22, 2004, t he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed i n form a paupe r i s and di s m i s s ed the V o ra ’s re m o v a l p e titio n p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 )( B )( ii) f o r l a c k o f

ju ri s d ic tio n . A ppel l ant ’ s m ot i ons t o vaca t e di d nott ol l the appe al s per i od beca us e both w er e fi l ed m ore than t en d ay s aft er entryof the dis m i ssal order. S ee F ed. R . A pp . P . 4(a) (4) . T hu s, A ppel l anthad unt i l O ct ober26, 2004, t o fi l e a t i m el ynot i ce of appea l . A ppel l antdi d not fi l e a not i ce of

appea l unt i l D ece m ber16, 2004, m or e than thi r t yday s aft erentr yof j udgm ent . A ccor di ngl y , gi ven the abs ence of a t i m el yfi l ed not i ce of appea l , the appe al of th e D istric t C o u rt’s S e p tem b e r 2 2 , 2 0 0 4 o rd e r is d ism iss e d f o r la c k o f

a p p e llate j ur i s di ct i on. V or a’ s appea l of the deni al of the mot i ons t o vaca t e i s t i m el y , how ever , and t hu s, w e hav e j uri sdi ct i on t o co nsi der the ap peal of t hese orders. V o ra w as g ran ted lea v e to p roc ee d in f o rm a p au p eris, an d the a p p ea l i s n o w b ef o re the C o u rtfo r de term ination p u rsua n t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B ). U n d er § 1 9 1 5 (e )(2 )(B ), th e C o u rt m u st d ism iss a n a p p e a l if it (i) is f riv o lo u s o r m a licio u s, (ii) f a ils t o s t a t e a c l a i m u p o n wh i c h r e l i e f ma yb e g r a n t e d , o r( i i i ) s e e k s mo n e t a r yd a ma g e s f r o m a4

defe ndantw i t h i m m uni t y . A n act i on orappea l can be fr i vol ous forei t herl egal orfac tual rea so n s. N eit zk e v . W il li am s, 4 9 0 U . S . 3 1 9 , 3 2 5 (19 8 9 ). A ft err evi ew i ng V or a’ s D i s t r i ctC our tpl eadi ngs and not i ce of appea l , w e conc l ude t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our tcorr ect l ydeni ed al l of the mot i ons t o vaca t e. H avi ng found no le g a l m e ri t to th is c a u s e , w e w ill d is m is s th e a p p e a l p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 )( B ).