USA v. Fimognari

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 	CASE NO. 3:23 CR 175
Plaintiff,
v. 	JUDGE JAMES R. KNEPP II
ANTHONY FIMOGNARI,
Defendant. 	ORDER
Currently pending before the Court is Defendant Anthony Fimognari’s pro se Motion for
Extension of Time in which to file a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
This Court does not have the authority to grant extensions of time to file § 2255 motions
before a defendant has filed such a motion. In United States v. Asakevich, the Sixth Circuit held
that a federal prisoner may not ask a court to grant him an extension of time to file a § 2255 motion
before he has filed the § 2255 motion. 810 F.3d 418, 419 (6th Cir. 2016). That is because “[i]n
order to create an Article III controversy and obtain more than an advisory opinion, [the defendant]
need[s] to file the § 2255 motion.” Id.
For the foregoing reasons, good cause appearing, it is
ORDERED that Fimognari’s motion (Doc. 58), be and the same hereby is, DENIED. 1
s/ James R. Knepp II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: December 23, 2025
1. Due to a clerical error, a previous non-document Order issued on December 22, 2025,
incorrectly stated that this Motion was granted. That Order is hereby VACATED.
Case: 3:23-cr-00175-JRK Doc #: 60 Filed: 12/23/25 1 of 1. PageID #: <pageID>