DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN 
RUSSELL ROBINSON, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 
Defendant. 
 
) 
) 
) 
 
) 
 
) 
Case No. 3:20-cv-0034 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
ORDER 
 
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant United States Attorney’s (“the 
Government”) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for lack of subject matter 
jurisdiction, ECF No. 11. For the reasons set forth below, the Government’s motion shall be 
granted. 
 
On April 22, 2020, Plaintiff Russell Robinson (“Robinson”) filed his complaint. ECF No. 
1. Though the precise nature of Robinson’s claims is unclear, it appears that Robinson alleges 
that his conviction was obtained as a result of the Government’s use of fraudulent recordings 
and an illegal modification to the indictment. ECF No. 1. Robinson seeks a writ of coram nobis 
to vacate his convictions, in addition to two-billion dollars in damages. See generally ECF Nos. 
1, 3.  
 
On June 23, 2020, the Government filed its motion to dismiss for failure to state a 
claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. ECF No. 11. Therein, the Government argues 
that Robinson’s complaint must be dismissed because the Court cannot issue a writ of coram 
nobis in a civil action, and in any event, Robinson is not entitled to such a writ. ECF No. 11, at 
7. On June 30, 2020, Robinson filed his opposition, appearing to argue that the Court can 
issue such a writ under Fed. R. Crim. P. 57(b). See generally ECF No. 12. The Court is not 
persuaded by Robinson’s argument. 
 
The Federal Rules of Civil procedure “govern the procedure in all civil actions and 
proceedings in the United States district courts… .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. Rule 60(e) clearly states, 
“The following are abolished: bills of review, bills in the nature of bills of review, and writs 
of coram nobis, coram vobis, and audita querela.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(e); see also U.S. v. Morgan, 
Case: 3:20-cv-00034-RAM-RM   Document #: 14   Filed: 09/30/21   Page 1 of 2
Robinson v. United States Attorney 
Case No. 3:20-cr-0034 
Order 
Page 2 of 2 
 
346 U.S. 502, 505 n. 4 (1952) (“Such a motion is a step in the criminal case and not, like 
habeas corpus where relief is sought in a separate case and record, the beginning of a 
separate civil Proceeding.”). Thus, it is clear to the Court that the relief Robinson seeks is not 
available in this proceeding. Accordingly, it is hereby 
 
ORDERED that the Government’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 11, is GRANTED. It is 
further 
ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED. It is further 
 
ORDERED that all pending motions are MOOT. And it is further 
 
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.  
 
DATED: September 30, 2021 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Robert A. Molloy_______ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ROBERT A. MOLLOY 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHIEF JUDGE  
 
Case: 3:20-cv-00034-RAM-RM   Document #: 14   Filed: 09/30/21   Page 2 of 2