was thus either November 30, the day the order was filed, or December 1, the day after. The limitations-period clock then continued to run until October 19, 2006, when (as the Court has determined) Petitioner filed his Coram Nobis Petition. See Nichols v. Brown, No. 09-CV-6825, 2012 WL 555043, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 21, 2012) (“[T]he limitations period was tolled ... when petitioner] filed his coram nobis petition.”). The tolling period thus started on either October 19, the filing date, or October 20, the day after. The clock remained stopped until June 15, 2007, when the Court of Appeals denied Petitioner’s request for leave to appeal the Appellate Division’s denial of the Coram Nobis Petition. See Flowers v. Ercole, No. 06-CV6118, 2009 WL 2986738, at *7 n. 3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2009) (<HOLDING>). The first day that counted in the resumed
holding that federal court may not issue writ of coram nobis for state prisoner holding that in the absence of a valid excuse for delay a coram nobis petition is subject to denial holding same for writ of error coram nobis holding that rule 4as time limits govern an appeal from a district court order granting or denying a petition for a writ of error coram nobis holding that a coram nobis petition remained pending until  the court of appeals denied petitioners application for leave to appeal the appellate divisions denial of his petition