Moore v. Lamarque, et al

Filing 129

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 9/9/2009 ORDERING 128 Motion for Extension is granted in part; Petitioner shall file and serve his objections to the 8/17/2009 findings and recommendations, if any, on or before 9/23/2009. No further extensions of time will be granted for this purpose; and no reply by respondent to petitioner's objections is required unless further ordered by the court. (Matson, R)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. ROBERT HOREL, Warden, Respondent. / Petitioner has requested an extension of time to file and serve objections to the findings and recommendations issued by the court in this case on August 17, 2009 . The court will grant petitioner's request in part. Petitioner is advised that the purpose of the objections is to inform the court of "those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(C). The purpose of such objections is not to provide the parties an opportunity to conduct additional research and present new arguments that were not included in the motion heard by the assigned magistrate judge. Finally, a legal brief and attachments in support of the objections is not required. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Petitioner's September 3, 2009 motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 128) is granted in part; 1 ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THOMAS EUGENE MOORE, Petitioner, No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DAD:4 moor0007.eot

2. Petitioner shall file and serve his objections to the August 17, 2009 findings and recommendations, if any, on or before September 23, 2009. No further extensions of time will be granted for this purpose; and 3. No reply by respondent to petitioner's objections is required unless further ordered by the court. DATED: September 9, 2009.

2