Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 838

摘要

Pro Se Petition for Writ of Mandamus · Mia Yang

This 54-page document is a pro se petition for a writ of mandamus filed by Mia Yang (real name protected) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Case No. 26-1072, docketed April 23, 2026) in connection with United States v. Miles Guo, SDNY Case 1:23-CR-118-1 (AT).

I. Introduction

The petitioner seeks an order from the Second Circuit compelling the Clerk of the SDNY and/or Presiding Judge Analisa Torres to formally docket and adjudicate the petitioner's motions filed under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3771, and the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA), 18 U.S.C. § 3663A. The petition argues that despite multiple inquiries and a "Motion to Compel Docketing," the District Court has failed to perform its ministerial duty to docket these filings, violating the petitioner's statutory rights and causing irreparable harm through potential loss of claims.

II. Background

The petition recites the procedural sequence:

• On March 8, 2026 and March 29, 2026, the petitioner submitted motions and corrected motions to the SDNY to amend the petitioner's April 7, 2025 remission filing with the DOJ and to formally assert statutory rights for restoration of invested funds;
• On October 14, 2025, the petitioner filed a petition pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) asserting a legal interest in property subject to forfeiture;
• As of the date of filing, the District Court has not docketed the petition or provided any response;
• The submissions were delivered via email and mail;
• On April 6, 2026 the petitioner sent inquiries by email and received the response: "THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ANY SUBMISSIONS ON THE DOCKET FOR THIS DATE";
• The petitioner then filed a "Motion to Compel Docketing" on April 8, 2026, which has been ignored.

IV. Reasons Why the Writ Should Issue

A. Clear Legal Duty to Docket

Under the CVRA, the court "shall decide any motion asserting a victim's right" and shall do so "forthwith" (18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3)). The petition argues that by refusing to docket the motion, the District Court effectively denies the petitioner the right to be heard without creating a record — characterized as an abuse of discretion and a violation of due process.

B. Risk of Irreparable Loss of CVRA/MVRA Rights

The CVRA and MVRA grant victims the right to "full and timely restitution" (18 U.S.C. § 3771(a)(6)). As the underlying criminal proceedings progress toward sentencing and final judgment, the petition argues that failure to docket creates a high risk that the petitioner's rights will be permanently extinguished or "lost" due to the finality of the court's upcoming orders.

C. No Other Adequate Remedy Exists

The petitioner reports having exhausted all administrative and lower-court avenues, including informal inquiries and a formal motion to compel in the District Court. The petition characterizes mandamus as the only remaining vehicle to ensure the District Court complies with its statutory obligations.

D. Failure to Docket the § 853(n) Petition Threatens Irreparable Property Deprivation

The petition argues that under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n), a person asserting a legal interest in forfeited property must be heard in an ancillary proceeding. By refusing to docket the October 14, 2025 filing, the District Court is proceeding toward final forfeiture without adjudicating the petitioner's claims. The petition characterizes this as a violation of the mandatory statutory scheme and a deprivation of Fifth Amendment due process — risking permanent loss of the petitioner's property without a day in court.

E. Compromise of the Judicial Record

The Clerk's failure to docket the petitioner's timely filings creates what the petition calls a "silent record," effectively shielding the District Court's inaction from appellate oversight. The petition argues this prevents the formation of a complete and accurate record of the proceedings, essential for due process.

Relief Requested

The petition asks the Second Circuit to issue a writ of mandamus directing the SDNY to docket and adjudicate the petitioner's filings under the CVRA, MVRA, and § 853(n).