United States of America v. Sean E. Jelen

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
_________________
Nos. 23-2187, 23-2212, & 23-2290
_________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
SEAN E. JELEN,
Appellant
_________________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. Criminal No. 3:16-cr-00156-001)
District Judge: Honorable Malachy E. Mannion
_________________
Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)
September 16, 2025
Before: BIBAS, MONTGOMERY-REEVES, and AMBRO, Circuit Judges.
(Opinion filed: September 23, 2025)
_________________
OPINION∗
_________________
MONTGOMERY-REEVES, Circuit Judge.
Sean Jelen pleaded guilty to bank fraud and attempted bank fraud. The District
Court sentenced him to 70 months of imprisonment and ordered $694,971.88 in
∗ This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not
constitute binding precedent.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
restitution. Jelen appealed, and we affirmed. See United States v. Jelen, No. 18-1284,
2024 WL 686155, at *1–3 (3d Cir. Feb. 20, 2024). Because Jelen’s restitution balance
remained unsatisfied, the Government applied for a writ of garnishment against payments
made by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to Jelen. The District Court issued the
writ of garnishment and explained next steps in the litigation. Instead of following those
steps, Jelen appealed.1 Because the order issuing the writ of garnishment was not an
appealable final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,2 we will dismiss this appeal for lack of
appellate jurisdiction.3
Section 1291 grants us “jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the
district courts of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1291. “[A] final decision will have two
effects. First, the decision will fully resolve all claims presented to the district court.
Second, after the decision has been issued, there will be nothing further for the district
court to do.” Aluminum Co. of Am. v. Beazer E., Inc., 124 F.3d 551, 557 (3d Cir. 1997)
(first citing Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233 (1945); and then citing Isidor
Paiewonsky Assocs., Inc. v. Sharp Props., Inc., 998 F.2d 145, 150 (3d Cir. 1993)). As a
1 We thank Tucker Law Group and Temple University Beasley School of Law for ably
serving as pro bono counsel for Jelen.
2 Jelen now concedes that we lack appellate jurisdiction. “[w]e have an independent
obligation at the threshold to examine whether we have appellate jurisdiction,” we will
explain why we agree. Rendell v. Rumsfeld, 484 F.3d 236, 240 (3d Cir. 2007) (citation
omitted).
3 Jelen filed three appeals but only advances arguments in No. 23-2187 relating to the
writ of garnishment; he has abandoned all arguments in Nos. 23-2212 & 23-2290.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
result, “there is no final order if claims remain unresolved and their resolution is to occur
in the district court.” Id. (citations omitted).
To determine whether the District Court’s issuance of a writ of garnishment is
appealable, we must first examine how writs of garnishment work under the Federal Debt
Collection Procedures Act (the “FDCPA”). Subject to exceptions not relevant here, it
provides “the exclusive civil procedures for the United States” to “recover a judgment on
a debt.” 28 U.S.C. § 3001(a)(1). An outstanding award of restitution under the
Mandatory Victims Restitution Act is a debt the FDCPA allows the Government to
recover. 18 U.S.C. § 3613(a), (f). One way the Government can recover the debt is by
seeking “a writ of garnishment against property (including nonexempt disposable
earnings) in which the debtor has a substantial nonexempt interest and which is in the
possession, custody, or control of a person other than the debtor, in order to satisfy the
judgment against the debtor.” 28 U.S.C. § 3205(a).
The FDCPA sets forth a detailed procedure for writs of garnishment. First, the
Government must apply for a writ of garnishment. Id. § 3205(b)(1). Second, if a district
court determines that the Government properly moved for a writ of garnishment, it “shall
issue” the writ. Id. § 3205(c)(1). Third, once the writ of garnishment issues, the
Government must serve a copy of the writ to the garnishee and judgment debtor and
certify to the district court that service was effected. Id. § 3205(c)(3). Fourth, after
service, the garnishee must file a “written answer to the writ of garnishment” describing
various characteristics of the identified property. Id. § 3205(c)(4). Fifth, “[w]ithin 20
days after receipt of the answer, the judgment debtor or the United States may file a

-- 3 of 4 --

4
written objection to the answer and request a hearing.” Id. § 3205(c)(5). Sixth and
finally, after the answer and objection period and if there is no hearing, “the court shall
promptly enter an order directing the garnishee as to the disposition of the judgment
debtor’s nonexempt interest in such property”; if a hearing occurs, then the court must
enter an order “within 5 days after the hearing, or as soon thereafter as is practicable.” Id.
§ 3205(c)(7).
A writ of garnishment becomes appealable when a district court issues a final
disposition order under § 3205(c)(7) because the disposition order resolves any
objections on the merits and disposes of the property at issue.4 In other words, the
disposition order, not the initial writ of garnishment, “fully resolve[s] all claims presented
to the district court” and leaves “nothing further for the district court to do.” Aluminum
Co. of Am., 124 F.3d at 557 (citations omitted); accord United States v. Swenson, 971
F.3d 977, 982 (9th Cir. 2020) (“A disposition order . . . concludes litigation of the writ on
the merits and is thus a final judgment for purposes of appeal.” (citing 28 U.S.C. § 3205
(c)(7)); United States v. Branham, 690 F.3d 633, 635 (5th Cir. 2012) (per curiam) (same).
Thus, we will dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.
4 We do not imply or suggest that a party seeking to terminate a final disposition order
under § 3205(c)(10)—a procedural posture not before us—cannot appeal once a district
court decides such a motion.

-- 4 of 4 --