ROYSTER V. LAMAS , No. 13-1065 (Fed. Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 13-1065 Document: 2 Page: 1 Filed: 12/03/2012 NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. Wniteb ~tatei1 Q[ourt of §ppeali1 for tbe jfeberaI '!Circuit MICHAEL ROYSTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. MARIROSA LAMAS, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF S. WILLIAMS, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF, Respondents-Appellees. 2013-1065 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in case no. 11-CV-0477, Chief Judge J. Curtis Joyner. ON MOTION ORDER The court considers whether this appeal should be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Michael Royster appears to have appealed from a decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denying his petition for a writ of Case: 13-1065 Document: 2 Page: 2 Filed: 12/03/2012 MICHAEL ROYSTER v. MARIROSA LAMAS 2 habeas corpus. This court is a court of limited jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1295. Based only upon our review of the papers transmitted by the district court, it does not appear that this case falls within this court's jurisdiction. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631, this court is authorized to transfer the case to a court in which the appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed or noticed. As such, it appears transfer to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is appropriate. Accordingly, IT Is ORDERED THAT: Absent objection received within 21 days of the date of filing of this order, this appeal shall be transferred to the Third Circuit pursuant to 28 U.s.C. § 1631. FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk s25
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
