Beniquez v. Johnson

Background

Jose Beniquez requested an extension of the deadline to appeal the court’s June 12, 2023 decision. Under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A), the notice of appeal was due July 12, 2023. A request for an extension had to be made by August 11, 2023 and had to show either good cause or excusable neglect.

The court received Beniquez’s request on August 21, 2023, but the request was dated August 8. Applying the prison-mailbox rule, the court assumed that Beniquez gave the request to prison officials on the date he signed it. The court therefore treated the request as timely for purposes of seeking an extension.

Reasoning

The court applied the excusable-neglect standard because Beniquez’s delay appeared to result at least partly from his own failure to follow a clear procedural deadline. The court considered four factors: possible prejudice to the opposing party, the length and effect of the delay, the reason for the delay and whether it was within Beniquez’s control, and whether he acted in good faith.

The first, second, and fourth factors favored an extension: the defendant experienced no meaningful prejudice, the delay was short, and the record did not show bad faith. The court gave controlling weight to the reason for the delay, however. It held that ignorance of procedural rules did not amount to excusable neglect, even for a person proceeding without a lawyer.

Disposition

The court denied Beniquez’s request to extend the deadline to file a notice of appeal. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying filing fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Beniquez a copy of the order.