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 2-21-2008 

# B oyd v . W a chovi a B ank N

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 . 07-3525

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 ll 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 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 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 " Bo yd v . W a chovi a B ank NA" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1548. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/15481

B L D - 79 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. 07- 3525

___________ 

### J OANN E B OY D, Appe l l ant v. WAC HO VI A B AN K, N. A.

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 07- cv- 02033) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J . C ur t i s J oyner

____________________________________ 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 P u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) o r S u m m a ry A c tio n P u rs u a n t to T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6 D ece m ber6, 2007 B efor e: SC I R I C A , M C K E E and R E N D E L L , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed: February21, 2008)

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM2

J oanne Boy d appea l s fr om t he or derof the U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he E a ste rn D istric t o f

P e n n sy lv a n ia d ism iss in g h e r c a se f o r f a ilu re to sta te a c laim . W e w ill af firm the D istri ct C o u rt ’s ord er. B oy d fi l ed i n D i s t r i ctC our ta “pe t i t i on fornot i ce of appea l , ” w hi ch named W achovi a B ank, N . A . ( “W achovi a”) as t he s ol e r es pondentand s oughtr evi ew of a M ar ch 19, 2007 act i on byt he U ni t ed St at es Supr eme C our t . B oy d i nvoked the Fi r s tand Four t eenth A m endment s of the C ons t i tut i on, al l egi ng t hatempl oy ees of the O ffi ce of t he C l erk of the U ni t ed St at es Supr eme C our tvi ol at ed herr i ght s i n pr oces s i ng a pet i t i on s he f iled in th a t co u rt. B o y d a ss e rte d th a t th e S u p re m e C o u rt O f f ice o f th e C ler k e n g a g e d in d isc rim in a tio n a g a in st h e r, an d th e d e n ial o f h e r S u p re m e C o u rt p e tit io n w a s a n a ttem p t to co n ce al crim inal ac ti o n s. O ther m aterial s att ac h ed to h er d o cu m en t fi led in D istri ct C o u rt cont ai ned B oy d’ s al l egat i ons t hatempl oy ees of the U ni t ed St at es Post al Ser vi ce e ngaged in c rim in a l an d re c k les s b e h a v io r, in c lu d in g m a il t a m p e rin g , ca u sin g d e lay i n m a il deli veryi n rel at i on t o h er Sup rem e C ou rtpeti t i on . B oy d asser t ed thatt hese em ploy ees’ act i ons w er e ai m ed att hw ar t i ng hereff or t s t o s t op a s her i ff’ s s al e on herr es i dence . W achovi a fi l ed a mot i on t o di s m i s s underR ul e 12( b) ( 6) of the Feder al R ul es of C i vi l Pr ocedur e. W achovi a ar gued, among ot hert hi ngs , t hatB oy d’ s documentcont ai ned no al l egat i ons t hatW achovi a enga ged i n anyconductt hataff ect ed B oy d’ s l egal r i ght s and cont ai ned no ave r m ent s t o expl ai n W achovi a’ s pr es ence i n t he l aw s ui t . B oy d di d not re sp o n d to th e m o tio n to d ism iss . T h e D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted W a c h o v ia’ s m o tio n to

### Boyd a l s o i ni t i at e d anothe r a c t i on i n Di s tri c t

Court , E. D. Pa . Ci v. No. 07- c v- 1 

### 02032, whi c h ha s r e s ul t e d i n anothe r a ppe a lbe for e thi s Court , C. A. No. 07- 2949. The m att e r wa s c ons ol i dat e d for

di s pos i t i on by

Cl e rk’ s Or de r

e nt e r e d Sept e m

be r 26, 2007, b ut w e w ill ad dress th e m atter sep arately . 3 di s m i s s , not i ng t hatt he mot i on appea r ed t o be uncont es t ed, t hatB oy d’ s i ni t i al pl eadi ng fai l ed t o compl yw i t h R ul e 3 and 8( a) of the Feder al R ul es of C i vi l Pr ocedur e, and that B o y d f a iled to sta te a v iab le c a u se o f a c tio n a g a in st W a c h o v ia. B o y d a p p e a ls. T h is 1 C our tadvi s ed the part i es t hatt he appe al w oul d be s ubm i t t ed forpos s i bl e di s m i s s al under 28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) orforpos s i bl e s um m aryact i on. B oy d has fi l ed a “ m ot i on forl eave t o corr ectaff

i r m at i ve r el i ef” i n oppos i t i on t o s um m aryact i on. U p o n re v iew o f

th e re c o rd a n d c o n sid e ra tio n o f th e a rg u m e n ts B o y d p re se n ts to t hi s C our t , w e agr ee w i t h t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s di s m i s s al of the ca s e forfai l ur e t o s t at e a vi abl e cl ai m . T he r ecor d i s devoi d of anys ugges t i on t hatW achovi a w as i nvol ved i n any w ro n g d o in g . A sid e f

ro m b e in g n a m e d in th e c a p tio n , W a c h o v ia is n o t m e n tio n e d a t all in B oy d’ s pl eadi ng. B e c a u se n o su b sta n tial q u e stio n is p re se n ted b yth is a p p e a l, w e w ill su m m a rily aff i r m t he or derof the D i s t r i ctC our tpur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 27. 4 and I . O . P. 10. 6.