IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
October 7, 2011
ANDREW N. YAO,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Petrese B. Tucker, U.S.D.J.
AND NOW, this _____ day of October, 2011, upon consideration of Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, Correct Sentence (Doc. 89), Respondent's Motion to Dismiss 2255 Petition for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Due to Untimeliness Under the AEDPA (Doc. 91), Petitioner's Response in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 94); Respondent's Reply to the Response (Doc. 95), and Petitioner's Sur-reply to Respondent's Reply (Doc. 97), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND DECREED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, Correct Sentence is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark this case as CLOSED for statistical purposes.
BY THE COURT:
Petrese B. Tucker
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.