Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 873
Second Circuit order of September 25, 2026 (docketed September 29) denying eleven tandem pro se mandamus petitions by third-party claimants and a registered crime victim; the denial as to docketing and considering their submissions on forfeited funds is without prejudice to renewal if the district court does not act within four months.
摘要
Order · Second Circuit Denies Eleven Pro Se Mandamus Petitions, With a Four-Month Clock on Docketing
A 3-page Order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, entered at a stated term on September 25, 2026 (Circuit Judges Richard C. Wesley, Richard J. Sullivan and Beth Robinson), certified September 28, 2026 and docketed in United States v. Ho Wan Kwok, 23 Cr. 118 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.) as ECF No. 873 on September 29, 2026. It disposes of eleven mandamus petitions heard in tandem under lead docket No. 26-2102 (Nos. 26-1072, 26-1129, 26-1178, 26-1192, 26-1296, 26-1476, 26-1626, 26-1629, 26-1731, 26-2102 and 26-2382). The petitioners proceed pro se, several under pseudonyms or first names only ("Doe", "Jo", "Sarah", "Anna", "Lionheart", "Anonymous Registered Crime Victim").
### What the petitioners asked for
Nine petitioners sought a writ compelling the district court to docket and consider their third-party pro se submissions asserting claims to forfeited funds in the criminal case. The petitioner styled Anonymous Registered Crime Victim sought to compel the district court to sentence the defendant promptly, enter a final order of forfeiture and commence a remission process for victims. Two petitioners sought to compel the district court to subpoena certain individuals, and one asked the Court of Appeals itself to vacate the defendant's judgment, stay the forfeiture proceedings and dismiss the case or remand for a hearing. The petitions were accompanied by motions for in forma pauperis status, to seal or redact personal identifying information, to amend a caption, to file supplemental papers, to stay district court proceedings, to reassign the case to a new district judge, and to vacate the judgment or dismiss the case.
### Rulings
- The Anonymous Registered Crime Victim petition is denied as moot: the district court has already sentenced the defendant, entered a final order of forfeiture and authorized the government to begin remission (citing Barrett v. United States, 105 F.3d 793, 794 (2d Cir. 1996)).
- The remaining petitions are denied under the mandamus standard of Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380–81 (2004): petitioners did not show that they lack adequate alternative means of relief, that their right to the writ is clear and indisputable, and that issuance is appropriate in the circumstances.
- As to docketing and considering the submissions, the denial is without prejudice to renewal if the district court does not docket and begin to consider them within four months of the order. Noting "the large number of third-party submissions received by the district court", the panel states that it trusts the court will address them expeditiously (citing United States v. Magassouba, 544 F.3d 387, 411 n.16 (2d Cir. 2008)).
- In forma pauperis motions are granted for purposes of filing the petitions. Motions to seal or redact are granted in part, insofar as they seek redaction of personal identifying information under Fed. R. Crim. P. 49.1(a) (incorporated by Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(5)); the Clerk is directed to seal the unredacted versions of one petition (No. 26-1192, docs. 1 and 4) and to amend that caption to remove the petitioner's first name.
- Leave to file supplemental papers is granted and the papers were considered. Motions to stay district court proceedings are denied as moot. Motions to reassign the case and to vacate or dismiss the district court case are denied.
The order is signed for the Court by Catherine O'Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court.