2010 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 3-9-2010 

# Mich a el S he monsky v

. F ede r al D ep o sit Ins ur ance C orp 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 . 09-4572

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_2010

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 no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 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 no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

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

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " Mich a e l S he mon sk

y v . F e de r al D eposit In s ur a nc e C orp " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1757. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1757HLD- 0 9 1 ( F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 0 ) 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. 09- 4572

___________ M I CH AE L R. S HE M ONS KY, A ppel l ant v . * F E DE RA L DE P OS I T I NS UR ANC E CO RP OR AT I ON *( A m ended pe rC l erk’ s O r derdat ed 2/ 1/ 10)

____________________________________ 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 ( E . D . Pa. C i vi l N o. 93- cv- 00004) D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e Paul S. D i amond

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed forPoss i bl e Sum m aryA ct i on Pur s uantt o T h ir d C ir c u it L A R 2 7 .4 a n d I.O .P . 1 0 .6

February25, 2010 B efor e: SC I R I C A , C hi ef J udge, W E I S and G A R T H , C i r cui tJ udges O pi ni on fi l ed: M ar ch 9, 2010

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C U R I A M.

M i chae l Shem ons kyappea l s pr o s e fr om t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s N ovember19, 2 0 0 9 o rd e r. W e w ill s u m m a ri ly af f ir m .2 I n February1993, t he D i s t r i ctC our tor der ed thatShem ons kybe perm anent l yenj oi ned fr om fi l i ng i n t he East ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a anyfur t her p lead ing s o r do cu m en ts r elati n g to this ca se w ith o u t pri o r ap p rov al of the c o u rt . In N ovember2009, Shem ons kys ubm i t t ed a “ M ot i on t o T r ans fert o t he B ankrupt cyC our t . ” T h e D is tr ic t n o te d th a t th e m o tio n w a s “ a lm o s t in c o m p re h e n s ib le a n d p la in ly f ri v o lo u s ,” an d d id n o t al low S h em o n sk yto f il e the m o ti o n b ec au se h e d id n o t fi rstsee k the c o u rt ’s perm i s s i on. H i s appea l fr om t he 1993 or derw as di s m i s s ed forl ack of j ur i s di ct i on, and w e af fi r m ed the s ubs equentdi s m i s s al of a 60( b) m ot i on t hathe fi l ed i n vi ol at i on of that o rd e r. S e e S h e m o n s k yv . R e s o lu tio n T ru s t C o rp ., 1 3 2 F e d . A p p x . 4 2 4 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 5 ).

T h e D is tr ic t C o u rt ’s re f u s a l to f ile S h e m o n s k y ’s m o tio n w a s p ro p e r. B eca us e no “s ubs t ant i al ques t i on” i s pr es ent ed byt hi s appea l , w e w i l l aff i r m t he or derof th e D istric t C o u rt.