Case Name: Sedley ALLEY, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Ricky BELL, Warden, Respondent-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-04-11
Citations: 405 F.3d 371
Docket Number: No. 04-5596
Parties: Sedley ALLEY, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Ricky BELL, Warden, Respondent-Appellant.
Judges: Before: BOGGS, Chief Judge; MARTIN, RYAN, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, ROGERS, SUTTON, and COOK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 405
Pages: 371–373

Head Matter:
Sedley ALLEY, Petitioner-Appellee, v. Ricky BELL, Warden, Respondent-Appellant.
No. 04-5596.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
April 11, 2005.
Paul R. Bottei, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Nashville, TN, for Petitioner-Appellee.
Joseph F. Whalen, III, Asst. Atty. General, Office of the Attorney General, Nashville, TN, for Respondent-Appellant.
Before: BOGGS, Chief Judge; MARTIN, RYAN, BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, ROGERS, SUTTON, and COOK, Circuit Judges.
This order was originally issued as an "unpublished order” filed on April 11, 2005. The court has now designated the order as one recommended for full-text publication.
Judge Gibbons recused herself from participation in this matter.

Opinion:
ORDER
On November 2, 2003, the district court issued an order staying Alley's execution and holding in abeyance any proceedings on his purported Rule 60(b) motion until this court decided In re Abdur'Rahman. This ruling was appealed to our court, and oral argument was held on June 16, 2004. On December 13, 2004, this court issued its opinion in Abdur'Rahman, 392 F.3d 174 (6th Cir.2004) (en banc), but the district court was unable to consider AbdurRahman's impact on the particular circumstances of Alley's filing because Alley's case was before this court on appeal.
On December 14, 2004, this court issued an opinion on that appeal, vacating the stay of execution and determining that Alley's filing could not be considered a proper Rule 60(b) motion under Abdur'Rahman. Alley v. Bell, 392 F.3d 822 (6th Cir.2004). Alley sought rehearing en banc.
We now grant rehearing en banc, and remand the case to the district court to determine, in the first instance, whether Alley's motion can be considered a proper Rule 60(b) motion under this court's opinion in AbdurRahman.