Dorris v. Adams
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/6/2011 ORDERING that the 16 order to show cause is DISCHARGED; ptnr's 19 "motion to proceed" w/ this action is GRANTED; respondent shall, w/in 21 days, file a reply to ptnr's opposition; and the court DEFERS ruling on ptnr's 18 motion for appointment of counsel, and respondent's 13 motion to dismiss. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
NATHAN ANTHONY DORRIS,
Petitioner,
11
12
13
14
15
No. 2:10-cv-02482 FCD KJN P
vs.
D. ADAMS, Warden,
Respondent.
ORDER
/
16
On March 31, 2011, this court ordered petitioner to show cause why he failed to
17
respond to respondent’s pending motion to dismiss, and to file such opposition. Petitioner has
18
timely filed a responsive “motion to proceed,” and an opposition (entitled “response”) to the
19
motion to dismiss. The order to show cause is therefore discharged.
20
Petitioner contends that respondent’s motion to dismiss, premised on petitioner’s
21
alleged failure to timely file his federal habeas corpus petition, is without merit. Although the
22
case docket indicates that the petition was filed on September 10, 2010, petitioner contends that
23
he gave the petition to prison officials for mailing on August 17, 2008, which is the date of
24
petitioner’s signature on the petition. Petitioner contends that he is entitled to equitable tolling of
25
the statute of limitations for the interval period.
26
Specifically, petitioner contends that he erroneously addressed his original petition
1
1
to the former address of the Fresno division of the United States District Court, Eastern District
2
of California, viz., “Clerk, U.S. District Court, Rm 5000[,] 1130 ‘O’ Street, Fresno California
3
938211 . . . not knowing that the new address was in effect [in Sacramento].” (Dkt. No. 17 at 3.)
4
Petitioner asserts that he addressed this petition to the outdated Fresno address because that was
5
the only address provided “in the Corcoran State Prison law library on 3A yard.” (Id.) Petitioner
6
asserts that he thereafter made repeated inquiries regarding the status of his petition, and has
7
attached copies of letters of inquiry, dated April 18, 2009, and September 8, 2010, addressed
8
respectively to “Court Clerk” and “The Court;” included with the second letter was a new copy
9
(with original dates) of the original petition. (Id. at 5-6.) The Fresno division relied on the new
10
copy of the petition to open this action on September 10, 2010 (Dkt. No. 1), and transfer the
11
action to the Sacramento division by order filed September 15, 2010 (Dkt. No. 3).
12
Petitioner contends that these facts demonstrate he has been diligent in pursuing
13
this case, but that extraordinary circumstances beyond his control rendered its opening untimely
14
(“due to the courts not forwarding his original writ or losing his original writ” (Dkt. No. 17 at3)).
15
The court requires additional information to assess petitioner’s contention and respondent’s
16
motion to dismiss.
17
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
18
1. The order to show cause filed March 31, 2011 (Dkt. No. 16) is discharged;
19
petitioner’s “motion to proceed” with this action (Dkt. No. 19) is granted.
2. Respondent shall, within twenty-one days after the filing date of this order,
20
21
file a reply to petitioner’s opposition; such reply shall contain a copy of petitioner’s “Mail Card”
22
(CDC Form 119) (which itemizes petitioner’s in-coming and out-going legal mail) for the
23
relevant period (August 2008 through the present), which respondent shall obtain from
24
petitioner’s place of incarceration.
25
1
26
The address of Fresno’s “new” federal courthouse, opened in 2005, is 2500 Tulare Street,
Suite 1501, Fresno, CA 93721.
2
3. The court defers ruling on petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel (Dkt.
1
2
No. 18), and respondent’s motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 13).
3
DATED: May 6, 2011
4
_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
5
6
7
dorr2482.fb
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
3
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?