Coleman v. Peery, et al.

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 12/19/17 ORDERING respondent is directed to file and serve a reply to petitioner's opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss this action within 21 days after the filing date of this order. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SAAHDI COLEMAN,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:16-cv-0652 MCE AC P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER

DAVID BAUGHMAN, Warden,
Respondent.

16
17

Respondent is directed to file and serve a reply to petitioner’s opposition to respondent’s

18

motion to dismiss this action, within twenty-one (21) days after the filing date of this order. The

19

reply brief shall address two cases relied on by petitioner in support of his argument that the

20

California courts recognize a “prison delivery rule” in determining the timeliness of inmate

21

appeals that is comparable to the “prison mailbox rule,” specifically, In Re Andres (2016) 244

22

Cal. App. 4th 1383 (see also Andres v. Marshall, 867 F.3d 1076, 1078 n.2 (9th Cir. Aug. 8,

23

2017); and In re Lambirth (2016) 5 Cal. App. 5th 915. Respondent may also address any other

24

pertinent matters in the reply brief.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26

DATED: December 19, 2017

27
28