Whether the Second Amendment and Due Process Clause protect an individual's right to purchase firearms and enlist in the military when erroneously designated as 'adjudicated mentally defective' in a federal database

No question identified. : 2. The complexity of the issues involved, including constitutional claims under the Second Amendment, Due Process Clause, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and 34 U.S.C. § 40911 (c), necessitates thorough preparation. 3. The Petitioner is a full-time student taking approximately 30 credits over the next six months, which significantly limits the time available to focus on the petition. 4. The Petitioner is also managing several legal cases pending in South Korea, where he is a victim but must still engage in legal work to properly accuse the responsible parties and ensure justice. 5. The Petitioner has limited resources and has been balancing legal, academic, and personal obligations, which have delayed the preparation of the petition. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court grant an extension of the certiorari filing deadline to March 3, 2025. Respectfully submitted, Date: 20241218 Heon Jong Yoo be | < vaow. et rue WVEUITIGIIL. 1 trays. | Vase ricu. but czuce ALD-184 NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 24-1833 HEON JONG YOO, agent of Hank Yoo, Appellant v. BRIAN BARKER; ASMA NISSAR; CARRIER CLINIC PSYCHIATRISTS; FBI NICS AGENTS; SOMERSET COUNTY CLERKS; RUTGERS UNIVERSITY POLICE DEPARTMENT; RWJ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 3-22-cv-01656) District Judge: Honorable Michael A. Shipp Submitted for Possible Dismissal due to a Jurisdictional Defect and Possible Summary Action Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 27.4 and 1.0.P. 10.6 September 19, 2024 Before: HARDIMAN, MONTGOMERY-REEVES, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: October 4, 2024) OPINION* PER CURIAM * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.0.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. St Se ew SSMS ES ge ee tere Heon Jong Yoo, proceeding pro se, appeals an order of the District Court dismissing his complaint on statute of limitations grounds. For the reasons that follow, we will summarily affirm. On March 15, 2022, Yoo filed a complaint against Brian Barker, an employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Clerk of Somerset County, New Jersey, Rutgers University policemen, and other defendants pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.! Yoo alleged that the Rutgers University police transported him to Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital in 2013 and in 2015. Both times, he was transferred to a mental health facility and released before his scheduled hearing due to a lack of evidence. Yoo averred that hospital employees lied on their reports and that the Somerset County Clerk transferred his records to Barker, who fraudulently labeled him as “adjudicated mentally defective/committed to a mental institution.” Complaint at 4; Ex. 2 to Complaint at 6. As a result of this designation, Yoo was unable to buy firearms in 2016 and enlist in the military in 2015 and 2016. He was convicted of a firearms offense in 2018. Yoo sought money damages and the removal of the “adjudicated mentally defective” designation from the FBI’s database. Several defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. The District Court determined that New Jersey’s two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions ' Yoo filed his complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint was transferred to the New Jersey District Court. 2 Voss erivey uuUUNm IU rays. vais ricu. lus Zuzet claims are time-barred. He alleges that he was admitted and discharged from the hospital and mental health facility, and designated “adjudicated mentally defective,” in 2013 and 2015, well over two years before he filed his complaint in 2022. To the extent Yoo states that he did not know that he was labeled “adjudicated mentally defective,” the court filing attached to his