Opinion
Civil Action 92-4917
06-28-2022
CARMEN WOODS v. J. F. MAZURKIEWICZ, et al.
ORDER
JOHN R. PADOVA, J.
AND NOW, this 28th day of June, 2022, upon consideration of Petitioner Carmen Woods' pro se “Motion for Leave of Court to File a Motion for 60(b)(6) Relief pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. Rule 60(b)(6)” (“Rule 60(b) Motion”) (Docket No. 22), “Suppl[emental] Motion under Rule 60(b)(6) to Correct Defects in Initial 60(b)” (“Supplemental Motion”) (Docket No. 23), Motion for Discovery (Docket No. 27), Motion to Expand the Record (Docket No. 28), and all documents filed in connection with all four Motions, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
1. Petitioner's Supplemental Motion is GRANTED insofar as it seeks to correct the Rule 60(b) Motion, and the Rule 60(b) Motion is CORRECTED as requested.
2. Petitioner's Rule 60(b) Motion is DISMISSED, in part for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and in part as untimely.
3. Petitioner's Motion for Discovery and Motion to Expand the Record are DISMISSED as moot.
4. There is no ground to issue a certificate of appealability because Petitioner has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.