2008 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 9-17-2008 

# In Re: Y a w Amp ons ah 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 . 08-3142

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd 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 l l a nova 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 2008 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a nova 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 l l a nova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" In Re: Y a w Ampon s ah " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 523. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/523HL D- 1 4 8 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. 08- 3142

___________ I N R E : YAW AM P ONS AH, Pet i t i oner

____________________________________ O n a Pet i t i on forW r i tof M andamus fro m the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( R el at ed t o C i v. N o. 08- 00114)

____________________________________ Sub mi t t e d Pu r s ua ntt o Rul e 21 , Fe d. R. A pp . P.

A ugus t29, 2008 B efore: S C IR IC A , C hief J ud ge, A L D ISE R T and G A R T H C i rcui tJudg es.

( Fi l ed: Sept ember17, 2008)

_________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_________ P E R C U R I A M. P e tit io n e r Y a w A m p o n sa h , a f e d e ra l p riso n e r p ro c e e d in g p ro se , file d th is mand a mus pe t i t i on pu r s ua ntt o 2 8 U. S. C. § 1 65 1, s e e ki ng a n o r de rdi r e c t i ng t he U . S. D i s t r i ctC our tforD i s t r i ctof N ew J er s eyt o rul e on hi s m ot i on t o vaca t e, s etas i de or
corr ecthi s s ent ence under28 U
. S. C
. § 2255. Fort he for egoi ng r eas ons , w e w i l l denyt he pet i t i on.T o t he ext entt hatA m pons ah t akes i s s ue w i t h t he governm ent ’ s ans w erhavi ng been 1 fi l ed out s i de the 45 day s or der ed byt he D i s t r i ctC our t , w e not e thatt he D i s t r i ctC our thas di s cr et i on overt he managementof i t s docket , I n r e Fi ne PaperA nt i t rus tL i t i g. , 685 F. 2d 8 1 0 , 8 1 7 (3 d C ir. 1 9 8 2 ), an d th a t th e D istric t C o u rt h a s th e d isc re tio n to d e c id e w h a t, i f a n y , s ig n if

ic a n c e to a f

f o rd th e g o v e rn m e n t’ s m in o r d e la yin re s p o n d in g .

2 A m pons ah fi l ed a mot i on under§ 2255 on J anuary9, 2008, i n t he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey . T he D i s tr i ctC our ts ubs equent l yadvi s ed Am p o n s a h o f

h i s r i g h t s u n d e rUn i t e d S t a t e s v . M i l l e r , 1 9 7 F . 3 d 6 4 4 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 9 9 )
. On A p ri l 24 , 2 0 0 8 , the D istri ct C o u rtd ir ec ted th e g o v ern m en t t o resp o n d to A m p o n sah ’s
m ot i on w i t hi n 45 day s . T he D i s t r i ctC our tal s o i ns t ruct ed A m pons ah nott o fi l e any addi t i onal m ot i ons orpaper s ot hert han a r epl yt o t he governm ent ’ s ans w er . O n J ul y3, 2 0 0 8 , c o u n s e l f

o r t h e g o v e rn m e n t e n te re d a n a p p e a ra n c e a n d f ile d a n a n s w e r. O n Ju ly1 0 , 2 0 0 8 , ap p are n tl yh av ing n o t y et rece ived the g o v ern m en t’ s an sw er, A m pons ah fi l ed thi s pet i t i on s eeki ng an or derdi r ect i ng t he D i s t r i ctC our tt o hearand deci de hi s m ot i on i n l i ghtof the governm ent ’ s fai l ur e t o r es pond w i t hi n 45 day s . A s t he governm enthas r es ponded t o A m pons ah’ s m ot i on, and the pr ocee di ngs i n t he D i s t r i ct C our tcont i nue apa ce, A m pons ah’ s conce r n has been a ddr es s ed. 1 A m pons ah al s o r eques t s t hathi s § 2255 m ot i on be as s i gned t o a di ffe r entj udge b a s e d o n t h e Di s t r i c tJ u d g e ’ s p u rp o r t e d l a c k o f i mp a r t i a l i t y , o rt h e a p p e a r a n c e t h e r e o f
. As A m ps onah has notfi l ed a mot i on r eques t i ng the D i s t r i ctJ udge’ s r ecus al , he has not demonst r at ed thathi s r i ghtt o m andamus i s “cl earand i ndi s put abl e. ” A l l i ed C hem. C orp.3

v. D ai fl on, I nc. , 449 U
. S. 33, 35 ( 1980) ( quot i ng B anker s L i fe & C as . C o. v. H ol l and, 346 U .S . 3 7 9 , 3 8 4 (1 9 5 3 ) ( q u o tin g U n ite d S ta te s v . D u e ll, 1 7 2 U .S . 5 7 6 , 5 8 2 (1 8 9 9 )) ). A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l denyA m pons ah’ s m andamus pe t i t i on.