Narrative Opinion Summary
Jose Nacacio Amu's appeal regarding the district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration of his motion to amend his pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion has been denied. The court determined it lacks jurisdiction over the appeal as the order in question is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1292, as well as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Consequently, Amu's motion to proceed in forma pauperis was also denied, and the appeal was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction. The court opted not to hold oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues sufficiently presented in the existing materials.
Legal Issues Addressed
In Forma Pauperis Status on Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Amu's request to proceed without the usual costs was denied due to the lack of jurisdiction over the appeal.
Reasoning: Consequently, Amu's motion to proceed in forma pauperis was also denied, and the appeal was dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction over Appealssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined it does not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the order is not final or appealable under the applicable statutes.
Reasoning: The court determined it lacks jurisdiction over the appeal as the order in question is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 1292, as well as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).
Oral Argument Not Requiredsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court decided that an oral argument was unnecessary as the facts and legal issues were sufficiently addressed in the submitted materials.
Reasoning: The court opted not to hold oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues sufficiently presented in the existing materials.