United States District Court, D. New Jersey
ARTHUR L. TIGGS, Petitioner,
STEVEN JOHNSON, et al., Respondents.
OPINION & ORDER
about December 10, 2015, pro se Petitioner Arthur L.
Tiggs initiated this habeas action in which he sought relief
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (DE 1.) On March 8, 2019,
1 denied Tiggs's habeas petition and denied him a
certificate of appealability. (DEs 23 and 24.) Approximately
91 days later, on June 7, 2019,  Tiggs filed a notice of
appeal challenging my March 8th decision. (DE 27.) Tiggs
concurrently filed two motions related to that appeal, both
of which are now pending before me: (1) a motion to file his
appeal out of time (at DE 25); and (2) his motion to proceed
in forma pauperis ("IFP") on
appeal (at DE 26). For the reasons detailed
herein, I will deny both motions.
Motion to file appeal out of time
seeks authorization to file his otherwise untimely appeal.
(DE 25.) This motion is governed by Rule 4 of the Federal
Rules of Appellate Procedure (the "Appellate
Rules"). Under Appellate Rule 4(a)(1)(A), a "notice
of appeal... must be filed with the district clerk within 30
days after entry of the judgment or order appealed
from." See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Here, my
final order denying Tiggs's habeas petition was filed on
March 8, 2019. Pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1)(A), Tiggs had until
April 8, 2019 to file his notice of appeal. Id.
His notice of appeal, filed on June 7, 2019, is therefore
in limited circumstances, authorized to extend the 30-day
filing deadline of Rule 4(a)(1)(A). Appellate Rule 4(a)(5)
provides, in pertinent part, that:
(A) The district court may extend the time to file a notice
of appeal if:
(i) a party so moves no later than 30 days after the time
prescribed by this Rule 4(a) expires; and
(ii) regardless of whether its motion is filed before or
during the 30 days after the time prescribed by this Rule
4(a) expires, that party shows excusable neglect or good
(C) No. extension under this Rule 4(a)(5) may exceed 30 days
after the prescribed time or 14 days after the date when the
order granting the motion is entered, whichever is later.
motion to extend his deadline to file his appeal, filed on
June 7, 2019, is untimely under Appellate Rule 4(a)(5)(A)0),
because that motion was not filed within thirty days after
the deadline to appeal (i.e., on or before May 8,
2019). For that reason alone, I am compelled to deny the
motion for an extension. See Hatch v. New Jersey Superior
Court, No. 15-2514, 2017 WL 1591845, at *2 (D.N.J. May
1, 2017) (applying substantially the same analysis in denying
petitioner's motion to extend his appeal deadline, and
further noting that "Congress specifically limited
district courts' ability to reopen the time for
appeal") (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2107(c)).
June 7, 2019 motion was not filed within the applicable
deadline under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A)(i). Accordingly,
the motion for extension of the time to appeal is
Tiggs's motion to proceed in forma ...