The third time was not the charm for convicted mortgage scammer Wesley A. Snyder.
The former Berks County resident has whiffed on another attempt to get his 12-year prison sentence reduced or thrown out.
U.S. District Chief Judge Yvette Kane, who sentenced Snyder in 2008, ruled that his latest motion failed to address the correct legal points.
Instead, ruled Kane, Snyder simply repeated his prior points.
"The Court will not entertain (Snyder's) attempt to reargue these unsuccessful theories," wrote Kane late last month.
Snyder, 76, who used to live in Oley, is in federal prison in Loretto, Cambria County, near Johnstown.
The collapse of Snyder's mortgage-broker business six years ago threw hundreds of borrowers into chaos.
They were shocked to learn Snyder had stolen their mortgage payments, sticking them with immense debts instead.
The scam swindled 800 victims -- including 300 Lancaster County residents -- out of $29 million.
Snyder pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud affecting a financial institution.
Besides sentencing Snyder to jail, Kane also ordered him to pay restitution.
Snyder began his efforts to lessen his sentence just nine days after Kane imposed it.
First, Snyder turned to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
He contended that Kane failed to adequately consider his age, health, community service and lack of malicious intent.
The 3rd Circuit affirmed Kane's sentence in 2010.
In 2011, Snyder tried a different approach.
He asked Kane to throw out his sentence because his attorney was ineffective.
Snyder also said he did not enter his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily.
Kane denied that motion in January. Snyder filed a motion the next month asking Kane to reconsider.
In her four-page decision, Kane noted that a motion for reconsideration "is a device of limited utility.
"Its purpose is to correct manifest errors of law or fact, or to present newly discovered evidence."
Although Snyder's motion states that legal standard for reconsideration, the motion "does not provide support for a finding" of a legal error, factual error or new evidence, the judge wrote.
"Instead, (Snyder) attempts to reassert the same arguments contained in his (2011) motion....," Kane ruled.
Snyder does challenge the truth "of some factual details related to his case," but does not back up his claims, said the judge.