United States District Court, D. New Jersey
RENE D. EDWARDS, Plaintiff,
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, et al., Defendants.
D. EDWARDS APPEARING PRO SE
MARIE BRADT STATE OF NEW JERSEY OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANTS
L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
case concerns claims by Plaintiff that Defendants violated
his constitutional rights when he was beaten and raped by his
cellmate in South Woods State Prison in Bridgeton, New
Jersey. On April 27, 2018, this Court granted Defendants'
motion for summary judgment, finding that Defendants were
entitled to judgment in their favor because Plaintiff had
failed to exhaust the administrative remedies that were
available to him, as he was required to do by 42 U.S.C.
§ 1997e(a) prior to filing suit. (Docket No. 128.)
December 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. (Docket
No. 131.) On May 1, 2019, the Third Circuit dismissed
Plaintiff's appeal because it was untimely. (Docket No.
133.) The Third Circuit explained:
The District Court entered its final order in the case on
April 27, 2018. Appellant was required to file his notice of
appeal with the District Court Clerk by Monday, May 28, 2018,
within the applicable thirty-day appeal period measured after
entry of the judgment or order. See Fed. R. App. P.
4(a)(1)(A). See also Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(1)(C) (a
calculated period ending on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal
holiday is extended to include the next day that is not a
Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday). Appellant's notice
of appeal, filed on December 11, 2018, was untimely. It is
well-settled that “the timely filing of a notice of
appeal is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v.
Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 213-14 (2007). Accordingly, we
lack jurisdiction over the appeal, and we do not reach the
motions filed by Appellant.
pending before this Court are four motions filed by
Plaintiff: (1) MOTION For Relief Of The Court's April 27,
2018 Order Granting Summary Judgment ; (2) MOTION To
File, New Federal Judge, Chief Of Federal ; (3) MOTION
For Oral Argument and Trial ; and MOTION For Oral
Argument and Trial . For the reasons expressed below,
all of Plaintiff's motions will be denied.
MOTION For Relief Of The Court's April 27, 2018 Order
Granting Summary Judgment 
motion for relief from the April 27, 2018 decision granting
summary judgment in Defendants' favor, which Plaintiff
brings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), presents two
arguments. First, Plaintiff disagrees with the Court's
finding that he was required to exhaust his administrative
remedies prior to bringing suit, and requests that the Court
reinstate his case. Second, Plaintiff requests that the Court
render its decision void in order to reset the clock for his
deadline to appeal because he did not receive notice of the
Court's decision until after the 30-day appeal deadline
had already expired. The Court does not find either argument
(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or
Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a
party or its legal representative from a final judgment,
order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;
(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable
diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for
a new trial under Rule 59(b);
(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic),
misrepresentation, or misconduct ...