Estrada v. Biter

Filing 29

ORDER Adopting 20 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION; ORDER DENYING Respondent's 14 Motion to Dismiss, DENYING Petitioner's 9 Motion for Discovery, DISMISSING Petitioner's 15 Motion to Lift Stay signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 2/19/2015. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAIME I. ESTRADA, Petitioner, 12 13 14 Case No. 1:14-cv-00679-AWI-GSA-HC ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF No. 20) v. ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS (ECF No. 14), DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY (ECF No. 9), DISMISSING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR STAY (ECF No. 1), AND DISMISSING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO LIFT STAY (ECF No. 15) MARTIN BITER, Respondent. 15 16 17 18 Petitioner is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 2254. 20 On November 20, 2014, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation 21 that recommended that Respondent’s motion to dismiss be denied, Petitioner’s motion for 22 discovery be denied without prejudice, Petitioner’s motion for stay and abeyance be denied as 23 moot, and Petitioner’s motion to lift the stay be denied as moot. (ECF No. 20). On November 24 20, 2014, the Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that 25 any objections were to be filed within thirty (30) days after being served with this Findings and 26 Recommendation. Respondent was granted two motions for extension of time to file objections. 27 On February 17, 2015, Respondent filed his response to the Findings and 28 Recommendation, in which he indicated that he does not intend to file objections to the statute of 1 1 limitations ruling by the Court. (ECF No. 28). 2 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 3 a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 4 the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper 5 analysis, and there is no need to modify the Findings and Recommendation. 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 7 1. The Findings and Recommendation issued November 20, 2014, is ADOPTED IN 8 9 FULL; 2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss is DENIED; 10 3. Petitioner’s motion for discovery is DENIED without prejudice; 11 4. Petitioner’s motion for stay and abeyance is DENIED as moot; 12 5. Petitioner’s motion to lift the stay is DENIED as moot; and 13 6. The matter is REFERRED BACK to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 Dated: February 19, 2015 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?