Third Circuit disposition — 091389np-pdf

1
HLD-97 (June 2009) NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-1389
___________
JOHN R. DALEY, JR.,
Appellant
vs.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS; WARDEN FCI SCHUYLKILL
___________________________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(M.D. Pa. Civ. No. 05-cv-01955)
District Judge: Honorable Malcolm Muir
____________________________________
Submitted for Possible Summary Action
Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6
June 30, 2009
Before: SCIRICA, Chief Judge, WEIS and GARTH, Circuit Judges
Opinion filed : July 17, 2009
_________
OPINION
_________
PER CURIAM.
John R. Daley, Jr., a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals an
order of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania denying
his post-judgment motion. We will affirm the District Court’s order.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
In 2005, the District Court granted in part and denied in part Daley’s
petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Daley successfully challenged the validity of a
Bureau of Prison regulation regarding the designation of inmates to community
confinement. The District Court subsequently denied Daley’s motion for attorney’s fees.
We affirmed the District Court’s order in August 2006.
Two years later, in August 2008, Daley filed a document in District Court
entitled “Re: Reinstatement of Civil Action No. D.C. Civ. No. 05-cv-01955, No. 06-
1799., Also Relief from Judgment, Motion to Vacate the Previous Judgment and Restore
the Action to Docket, ‘Attorney Fees,’ Costs.” The District Court denied the motion,
noting that Daley’s filing consisted of citations and disjointed statements and failed to
include a recitation of the facts, any argument, and any attempt to establish that the
motion was timely.
In December 2008, Daley filed another document, which was entitled “Re:
(Petitioner’s-Plaintiff’s) Motion for Docket Number and Status Also Attorney Fee’s,
Costs . . . Reinstatement of Civil Action No. 4:CV-05-2181; No. 06-2850, Also Relief
From Judgment, Motion to Vacate the Previous Judgment and Restore the Action to
Docket for Trial.” At the top of the document, Daley placed the docket number for this
case, 05-cv-01955. The District Court denied the motion, again noting that Daley’s filing
consisted of citations and disjointed statements and failed to include a recitation of the
facts, any argument, and any attempt to establish that the motion was timely. Daley

-- 2 of 3 --

Daley’s motion to reopen his appeal and motion to proceed in forma pauperis are1
granted. Daley’s motion to reconsider the Clerk’s order dated March 19, 2009, is denied.
appeals the denial of his December 2008 motion.1
The District Court did not err in denying Daley’s motion, which the District
Court aptly described as consisting of citations and disjointed statements and lacking a
recitation of the facts or any argument. Accordingly, because this appeal does not raise a
substantial question, we will summarily affirm the order of the District Court.

-- 3 of 3 --