Hill v. White et al

Filing 29

ORDER, ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 27 ; that the petitioner's Motion to Request Summary Judgement F.R.C.P. 56(c)(A) - with Request to be Expedited 21 , Petitioners Reply Move for Dismissal of #CR 2006-009614-001 with Prejudice/Expedited Release 22 , Petitioner[s] Motion to Expedite his Reply 23 ), and the petitioner's Motion for Default Judgement... with Request to be Expedited... 24 are all denied. Signed by Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 11/2/10. (DMT)

-LOA Hill v. White et al

Doc. 29

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Isiah Hill, Petitioner, vs. William White, et al., Respondents.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV-10-1339-PHX-PGR (LOA)

ORDER

Having reviewed de novo the Magistrate Judge Anderson's Report and Recommendation in light of the petitioner's objections thereto (Doc. 28), the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge correctly concluded that the petitioner's motions for entry of default, summary judgment, and other relief based on the respondents' failure to answer (Docs. 21-24) are meritless at this time because the respondents currently have until November 24, 2010 in which to file their answer to the petitioner's habeas petition. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 27) is accepted and adopted by the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitioner's Motion to Request Summary Judgement F.R.C.P. 56(c)(A) - with Request to be Expedited ... (Doc.

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

21), Petitioner's Reply" Move for Dismissal of #CR 2006-009614-001 with Prejudice/Expedited Release (Doc. 22), Petitioner[`s] Motion to Expedite his Reply (Doc. 23), and the petitioner's Motion for Default Judgement ... with Request to be Expedited ... (Doc. 24) are all denied. DATED this 2nd day of November, 2010.

-2-