Opinion
Civil Action 19-CV-5210
11-08-2022
JAMES ARMSTRONG, Petitioner, v. KATHY BRITTAIN, et al., Respondents.
ORDER
BERLE M. SCHILLER, J.
AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 2022, in consideration of Petitioner James Armstrong's Motion for Relief from Judgment Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) (ECF No. 53), it is ORDERED that:
1. The Motion is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without prejudice to Armstrong's right to file with the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit an application to file a second or successive habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A).
2. A Certificate of Appealability is DENIED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) because reasonable jurists would not debate the propriety of this Court's procedural ruling with respect to these claims. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000).