Roderick Gene Reed v. Matevousian

Filing 21

ORDER denying 20 Motion to file late Traverse signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/26/2016. (Lundstrom, T)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RODERICK GENE REED,

12

Petitioner,

13
14
15

MATEVOUSIAN, Warden at USP
Atwater,

(Doc. 20)

Respondent.

17

19

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO FILE LATE TRAVERSE

v.

16

18

No. 1:15-cv-01019-SKO HC

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.1 On November 25, 2015, Respondent submitted a motion to
dismiss in reply to the petition. Pursuant to the Court’s order requiring Respondent to file a

20
21
22

response and setting briefing schedule (the “response order”), Petitioner then had opportunity to
file opposition or a statement of non-opposition within 21 days (on or before December 16,

23

2015). Doc. 5 at 3. Petitioner did not do so. As provided by the response order, the Court

24

deemed the matter submitted 30 days after Respondent filed the motion to dismiss (December 28,

25

2015).

26

///

27
1

28

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), both parties consented, in writing, to the jurisdiction of a United States
Magistrate Judge to conduct all further proceedings in this case, including the entry of final judgment.

1

1
2
3

Petitioner asserts that he filed a motion for extension of time on or about December 24,
2015. The Court’s docket in this case does not reflect the filing of any extension of time for
Petitioner to file a reply (traverse) prior to the motion now before the Court. Even if Petitioner

4
had filed a motion to extend time on or about December 24, 2015, the motion would have been
5
6

untimely. A court may only enlarge the time “on motion made after the time has expired if the

7

party failed to act because of excusable neglect.” F.R.Civ.P. 6(b)(1)(B). Petitioner does not

8

allege excusable neglect.
Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion for leave to file a late reply (traverse) is hereby

9
10

DENIED.

11
12
13
14

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

February 26, 2016

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2