Vasquez v. Spearman et al

Filing 21

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/16/2020 GRANTING 20 Request for Relief from Judgment; VACATING 18 Order Adopting Findings and Recommendations and 19 Judgment; GRANTING petitioner 30 days to file objections to 15 Findings and Recommendations; and GRANTING respondent 14 days after service of the objections to file a response. (Coll, A)

Download PDF
Case 2:18-cv-00073-TLN-KJN Document 21 Filed 11/17/20 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ISAAC VASQUEZ, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:18-cv-00073-TLN-KJN Petitioner, v. ORDER M. ELIOT SPEARMAN, Respondent. 16 17 18 19 Petitioner Isaac Vasquez (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 24, 2020, the magistrate judge recommended that Petitioner’s application for a 20 writ of habeas corpus be denied. (ECF No. 15.) On May 19, 2020, the magistrate judge granted 21 Petitioner an extension of time to July 21, 2020 to file objections. (ECF No. 17.) Petitioner did 22 not file objections. On October 7, 2020, this Court adopted the April 24, 2020 findings and 23 recommendations and judgment was entered. (ECF Nos. 18, 19.) 24 On November 4, 2020, Petitioner filed a request to file objections to the findings and 25 recommendations. (ECF No. 20.) This Court construes Petitioner’s request to file objections as a 26 request for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Rule 60(b) 27 provides that a court “may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, 28 or proceeding” for a number of reasons, including “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable 1 Case 2:18-cv-00073-TLN-KJN Document 21 Filed 11/17/20 Page 2 of 2 1 neglect.” Petitioner seems to argue that excusable neglect should serve as a basis for 2 reconsideration. Petitioner alleges that he failed to file timely objections because the inmate 3 assisting him with this action was transferred to a different facility. (ECF No. 20.) Petitioner 4 implies that he is receiving help once more. (Id.) 5 Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. Petitioner’s request to file objections (ECF No. 20), construed as a request for relief 7 from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), is GRANTED; 8 2. The judgment and order adopting the April 24, 2020 findings and recommendations 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 (ECF Nos. 18, 19) are VACATED; 3. Petitioner has thirty (30) days from the date of this order to file objections to the April 24, 2020 findings and recommendations (ECF No. 15); and 4. Respondent may file a response to the objections within fourteen days (14) after service of the objections. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: November 16, 2020 16 17 18 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 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?