No. 24-5541

In Re Joe Nathan Pyatt, Jr.

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2024-09-13
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: all-writs-act clerk-of-court judicial-review mandamus non-discretionary-act supreme-court-procedure
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-11-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Supreme Court has authority to issue a Writ of Mandamus under the All Writs Act to compel its own Clerk to perform a non-discretionary act

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Mr. Pyatt will be presenting two pure questions of law and one mixed question of law and fact for review in this Petition material to his criminal proceeding moving forward. The questions presented are as follows; 1. Does the United States Supreme Court have authority to issue a Writ of Mandamus pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 USC 1651 to compel its own Clerk of the Court to perform a non-discretionary act? 2. Does a United States Court of Appeals have authority pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 USC 1651 to compel its own Clerk of the Court to perform a duty owed to a party? , : 3. If a motion is pending by a party to litigate his own appeal, does the Clerk of the Court have a clear duty to accept filings from the party; in light of 11th Cir. R. 25-1, to act on matters where the obligation to act, by the Court, is statutory and not discretionary? { ‘ {,

Docket Entries

2024-11-04
Petition DENIED.
2024-10-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2024.
2024-10-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-08-15
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 15, 2024)

Attorneys

Joe N. Pyatt
Joe Pyatt — Petitioner
Joe Pyatt — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent