1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MICHAEL R. SHEMONSKY, : Civil No. 04cv2759

Plaintiff :

: Judge Jones

v. :

:

THOMAS I. VANASKIE, et al., :

Defendants :

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

June21, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

Pending before the Court is a Motion to Stay (“the Motion”) (doc. 14) filed

by Plaintiff Michael R. Shemonsky (“Plaintiff” or “Shemonsky”) on June 14,

2005. For the reasons that follow, the Motion will be denied. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND/PROCEDURAL HISTORY:

On or about November 19, 2002, Plaintiff filed a complaint naming as

defendants Thomas I. Vanaskie, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for

the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and the Third Circuit Judicial Conference

(collectively “Defendants”) in the Court of Common Pleas of Monroe County,

Pennsylvania. On December 17, 2004, Defendants filed a Notice of Removal in

the above-captioned matter to this Court. (See Rec. Doc. 1). 

On January 19, 2005, this Court granted Defendants’ Motion for an

Case 4:04-cv-02759-JEJ Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 1 of 4
2

Enlargement of Time in which to file a motion to dismiss in this case. (See Rec.

Doc. 3). On January 21, 2005, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, as well as a

supporting brief. (See Rec. Docs. 5-6). Plaintiff appealed our January 19, 2005

Order to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which issued an order on May 17,

2005 dismissing Plaintiff’s appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. (See Rec.

Doc. 13). 

On June 14, 2005, Shemonsky filed the instant Motion.

DISCUSSION:

In his Motion, Shemonsky merely states that he requests we stay the abovecaptioned case as he will be filing a writ of mandamus with the Third Circuit. (See

Rec. Doc. 14).

In the Third Circuit’s afore-mentioned May 17, 2005 order, the Third Circuit

stated, “To the extent that Shemonsky requests in his motions to compel that we

order the District Court to act on petitions for leave to file or process notices of

appeal, the motions are denied without prejudice to his filing a proper mandamus

petition in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 21.” See id. at 2. 

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 21 allows a party to file a writ of

mandamus with the clerk of the court of appeals. Fed.R.App.P. 21(a)(1). Federal

Rule 21 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

Case 4:04-cv-02759-JEJ Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 2 of 4
3

(1) A party petitioning for a writ of mandamus or prohibition directed

to a court must file a petition with the circuit clerk with proof of

service on all parties to the proceeding in the trial court. The party

must also provide a copy to the trial-court judge. 

(2)(A) The petition must be titled ‘In re [name of petitioner].’

(B) The petition must state:

 (i) the relief sought;

 (ii) the issues presented;

 (iii) the facts necessary to understand the issue presented by the 

 petition; and 

 (iv) the reasons why the writ should issue. 

Fed.R.App.P. 21(a)(1)-(2)(B). 

Shemonsky’s Motion to Stay the above-captioned case consists of one

sentence and Shemonksy fails to cite any rules or cases in support thereof. 

Moreover, Federal Rule 21, which addresses writs of mandamus does not address

staying an action in the district court when a writ of mandamus is filed with the

circuit court of appeals. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay is denied. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Stay (doc. 14) is DENIED.

2. Plaintiff shall have fifteen (15) days from the date of this Order

to file a brief in opposition to Defendants’ pending Motion to

Dismiss (doc. 5).

3. Defendants may file a reply brief within ten (10) days after

receiving Plaintiff’s submission, in accordance with the local

Case 4:04-cv-02759-JEJ Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 3 of 4
4

rules.

4. If Plaintiff does not file a brief in opposition to Defendants’

Motion to Dismiss within fifteen (15) days from the date of this

Order, the Court shall rule on the Motion to Dismiss.

s/ John E. Jones III

 John E. Jones III

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02759-JEJ Document 15 Filed 06/21/05 Page 4 of 4