Patterson v. Martinez

Filing 21

ORDER Denying Petitioner's 19 Rule 72(a) Motion, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/14/16. (Gonzalez, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

VESTER L. PATTERSON,

Case No. 1:16-cv-01215-LJO-SAB-HC
ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S RULE
72(a) MOTION

Petitioner,

12
v.

13

(ECF No. 19)
14

JOEL MARTINEZ,
Respondent.

15
16
17

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28

18 U.S.C. § 2254.
19

On November 4, 2016, Petitioner filed the instant motion, requesting review of the

20 magistrate judge’s denial of Petitioner’s motion to expedite proceedings. (ECF No. 19). The
21 Court may modify or set aside the magistrate judge’s order only if it is “clearly erroneous or
22 contrary to law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). As the magistrate judge
23 previously advised Petitioner, the Court’s docket of pending cases is substantial and the Court
24 must act first on those matters that have been pending the longest. The Court finds that the
25 magistrate judge’s denial of the motion to expedite proceedings was not clearly erroneous or
26 contrary to law. The Court will review Petitioner’s habeas petition when it is fully briefed and
27 ready for review.
28 ///

1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s Rule 72(a) motion (ECF No.

2 19) is DENIED.
3
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____

December 14, 2016

UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT 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