Moritz v. Woods

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION CONNY MORITZ, 2:07-CV-15369 Petitioner, ORDER (1) DENYING THE vs. MOTION TO AMEND (ECF NO. 93), AND (2) THE MOTION JEFFREY WOODS, FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF NO. 94) Respondent. On April 28, 2022, this Court transferred petitioner’s Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment to the United States Court of Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (b)(3)(A) for authorization to file a second or successive habeas petition and denied the motion for an evidentiary hearing. (ECF No. 92). Petitioner’s case is now pending before the Sixth Circuit. See In Re Moritz, No. 22-1376 (6th Cir.). Petitioner filed a motion to amend his Rule 60(b) motion and a motion for reconsideration. A district court loses jurisdiction over a state prisoner’s habeas petition when it transfers it to Court of Appeals on the ground that it is a second or successive petition. See Jackson v. Sloan, 800 F. 3d 260, 261 (6th Cir. 2015). This Court thus lacks jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1631 and 2244(b)(3)(A) to consider petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the transfer order or his motion to amend the Rule 60(b) motion. Id., at 261-62 . Accordingly, the motion to amend (ECF No. 93) and the motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 94) are DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 6, 2022 s/Terrence G. Berg TERRENCE G. BERG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE