(HC) Brown v. Northern Kern State Prison, et al.

Filing 24

ORDER GRANTING 20 Petitioner's Motion for Review of Petition, signed by Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta on 1/8/2022. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 KENYON DERRAL BROWN, 12 13 14 15 16 Petitioner, Case No. 1:21-cv-01061-NONE-HBK ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR REVIEW OF PETITION v. (Doc. No. 20) NORTH KERN STATE PRISON, DIRECTOR OF CDCR, Respondent. 17 18 19 20 Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s pleading docketed by the clerk as a “motion for 21 summary judgment” on October 27, 2021. (Doc. No. 20). Petitioner, who is pro se, has pending 22 a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. No. 1). In his one-page 23 pleading, Petitioner asks the Court “to make a ruling in the interests of justice” because he 24 believes he has “proved cognizable claims.” (Doc. No. 20 at 1). The Supreme Court has 25 instructed the federal courts to liberally construe the “inartful pleading[s]” of pro se litigants. 26 Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982). The Court liberally construes Petitioner’s 27 pleading as a motion for the Court to undertake a review of the petition and respondent’s answer 28 and issue a ruling in this case. 1 Courts exercise discretion in how to manage their own docket. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 2 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992). And while this Court endeavors to handle all matters as 3 expeditiously as possible, this Court has “long labored under one of the heaviest caseloads in the 4 nation.” See Standing Order in Light of Ongoing Judicial Emergency in Eastern District of 5 California. Accordingly, Petitioner is advised that the Court will issue findings and 6 recommendations regarding his petition once it completes review of the record in this case 7 bearing in mind its current docket and other pending matters. Consequently, Petitioner’s motion 8 for review is granted to the extent that the Court will consider and review this matter as quickly as 9 its caseload permits. 10 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 11 Petitioner’s construed motion for review of the petition (Doc. No. 20) is GRANTED to 12 the limited extent that the Court will review this case as expeditiously as possible considering its 13 current caseload. 14 15 16 Dated: January 8, 2022 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?