Ekdahl v. Diaz

Filing 46

ORDER granting nunc pro tunc 44 Motion request for judicial notice signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 2/12/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

EMIL JOSEPH EKDAHL,
Petitioner,

12
13
14
15

v.
RALPH DIAZ, Warden,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-00542-AWI-JLT
ORDER GRANTING NUNC PRO TUNC
PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL
NOTICE
(Doc. 44)

16
17

In support of his traverse, Petitioner filed a request for judicial notice of documents issued by

18

the Board of Parole Hearings. (Doc. 44) Respondent did not oppose this request. When considering

19

the merits of Petitioner’s claims, the Court considered and relied upon these documents. (Doc. 45 at

20

13, n. 4) However, the Court failed to explicitly rule on Petitioner’s motion at that time.

21

The Court may take notice of facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by

22

resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States

23

v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 F.2d 331, 333 (9th Cir. 1993). The record of the Board of Parole Hearings is a

24

source whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned, and judicial notice may be taken of these

25

records. Mullis v. United States Bank. Ct., 828 F.2d 1385, 1388 n.9 (9th Cir. 1987); Valerio v. Boise

26

Cascade Corp., 80 F.R.D. 626, 635 n. 1 (N.D.Cal.1978), aff'd, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.); see also

27

Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Coil, 887 F.2d 1236, 1239 (4th Cir. 1989); Rodic v. Thistledown Racing

28

Club, Inc., 615 F.2d 736, 738 (6th. Cir. 1980). Therefore, the Court GRANTS Petitioner’s request
1

1

that the Court take judicial notice (Doc. 44) of the records proffered by Plaintiff nunc pro tunc.

2
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 12, 2016

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2