Peterson v. Lizarraga

Filing 28

ORDER Discharging Order to Show Cause; ORDER Granting 30 Day Extension of Time signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 01/08/2018. (Flores, E)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD ANTHONY PETERSON, No. 1:17cv-01537-LJO-SKO HC 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER DISCHARGING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 JOE LIZARRAGA, Warden of MCSP, 15 Defendant. ORDER GRANTING 30 DAY EXTENSION OF TIME 16 (Doc. 25) 17 18 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant 19 20 to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 4, 2018, this Court ordered Respondent to show cause within 21 fifteen days why he should not be sanctioned for failure to file an answer to the petition. The 22 order provided that the Court would consider Respondent’s filing of the answer to be an 23 appropriate response. 24 25 On January 5, 2018, Respondent advised the Court that on December 29, 2017, he filed a motion for a 30-day extension of time; however, Respondent filed the motion using the case’s 26 27 28 1 1 original case number, 2:17-cv-01693.1 This case was transferred from the Sacramento Division 2 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California to this Court on 3 November 17, 2017. All further submissions should be filed under case number 1:17-cv-01537. 4 Respondent declares in his motion for 30-day extension of time that due to the press of 5 6 7 business he requires additional time to prepare a response. Respondent has shown good cause for an extension of time. Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 8 9 1. The order to show cause issued January 4, 2018, (Doc. 25), be discharged. 10 2. Respondent is DIRECTED to file his response by January 29, 2018. 11 12 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 8, 2018 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1 27 28 Respondent contends that the Court concluded “reasonably, but mistakenly, that Respondent had failed to respond to the petition or seek an application for an extension of time within the allotted time.” (Doc. 26 at 3.) Respondent is responsible for the management of his own case, including ensuring that documents are filed with the appropriate court, following the transfer of the case from the Sacramento division to the Fresno division of this district . 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?