Jane Doe V. USDC-NVL

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3), parties can agree to an extension of the 72-hour deadline with approval from the court of appeals, so long as the extension does not involve a stay or continuance of the underlying district court proceedings for more than five days.

As a sex trafficking victim, Petitioner sought to get restitution under 18 U.S.C. § 2259(b)(3). The district court denied restitution because the defendant in the criminal trial was not found guilty under this statute. Petitioner filed a writ of mandamus seeking her right under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) instead. Petitioner filed a joint motion to extend the 72-hour statutory period for the court of appeals to decide the writ. The Ninth Circuit had to determine whether the CVRA deadlines were jurisdictional and if the court had the authority to extend the deadline. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3771(d)(3), parties can agree to an extension of the 72-hour deadline with approval from the court of appeals, so long as the extension does not involve a stay or continuance of the underlying district court proceedings for more than five days. The Ninth Circuit held that the deadlines CVRA imposed are non-jurisdictional and that the court has the power to extend the deadline. The Court found that the statute only prohibits a stay or continuance in district court proceedings. MOTION GRANTED.