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 8-13-2008 

# In Re: O s sie R . T

r 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 . 08-2910

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: O s sie R . T

r a " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 657. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/657A L D - 265 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- 2910

___________ I N RE: OSS I E R. TRADER , Pet i t i oner

____________________________________ O n a Pet i t i on forW r i tof M andamus fr om t he U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ctC our tfort he East ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a

( R el at ed t o E . D . Pa. C r i m . N o. 94- cr - 00534- 02)

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

J ul y31, 2008 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , FI SH E R A N D H A R D I M A N , C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed A ugus t13, 2008 )

_________ OP I NI ON

_________ P E R C UR I AM

O s s i e R ober tT r aderi s a fe der al pr i s onerw ho pet i t i ons fora w r i tof m andamus pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1651 or der i ng t he D i s t r i ctC our t , i n l i ghtof the S u p re m e C o u rt’s d e c isio n in Z e d n e r v . U n ited S tate s, 5 4 7 U .S . 4 8 9 (2 0 0 6 ), to ru le o n h is M o tio n to D is m is s f

o r V io la tio n s o f

th e S p e e d yT ri a l A c t th a t h e f ile d in 1 9 9 5 . M andamus i s a dr as t i c r emedygr ant ed onl yi n extr aor di narycas es . See I n r e D i etD rugs P rods. L i ab. L i t i g. , 41 8 F . 3d 37 2, 37 8 (3d C i r. 20 05 ). T o p revai l , t he p et i t i on er m ust2

es t abl i s h t hathe has “no otheradequa t e means ” t o obt ai n r el i ef, and thathe has a “c l ear a n d in d is p u ta b le ” ri g h t to is s u a n c e o f th e w ri t. I d . a t 3 7 8 -7 9 . Si nce hi s convi ct i on, T r aderhas fi l ed a numberof m ot i ons pur s uantt o 28 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 5 a n d F e d . R . C iv . P . 6 0 in th e D is tr ic t C o u rt s e e k in g to re in s ta te h is m o tio n . A ft ert he D i s t r i ctC our tdeni ed a r ece ntm ot i on forl ack of j ur i s di ct i on on t he gr ounds t hat it co n stitu ted a se c o n d o r su c c e ss iv e p e tit io n f iled w ith o u t au th o riz a tio n f ro m th is C o u rt, h e a p p e a le d . T h is C o u rt d e n ie d T ra d e r’ s re q u e s t f o r a c e rt if

ic a te o f a p p e a la b ility. T hi s i s T r ader ’ s t hi r d at t empt t o r evi ve hi s SpeedyT r i al cl ai m byw ayof a p e tit io n f o r a w rit o f

m a n d a m u s. W e d e n ied h is f irst p e tit io n o n th e g ro u n d s th a t h is M ot i on t o D i s m i s s had bee n t erm i nat ed upon entr yof hi s gui l t ypl ea a nd w as no l onger pendi ng. See 161 Fed. A ppx. 205 ( 3d C i r . 2006) . A nd, w e deni ed hi s s econd pe t i t i on, w hi ch i s i dent i cal t o t he i ns t antpet i t i on, i n w hi ch he a gai n ar gues t hatZ edners houl d be appl i ed t o r etr oact i vel yi nval i dat e the t erm i nat i on of hi s M ot i on t o D i s m i s s . See 226 F e d .A p p x . 1 0 0 (3 d . C ir. 2 0 0 7 ). A f ter re v iew in g th e in sta n t p e tit io n , w e se e n o re a so n to t r eati tanydi ffe r ent l yfr om i t s pr edec es s or s . T o t he ext entt hatT r aders eeks t o chal l enge hi s convi ct i on bas ed on the SpeedyT r i al A ct , he s houl d fi l e a § 2255 mot i on. See 28 U . S. C . §§ 2244 & 2255. I n anyevent , t he pet i t i on fora w r i tof m andamus i s deni ed.