Campbell v. Henry

Filing 58

ORDER granting extension of time to file a traverse re 57 Response to Order to Show Cause filed by Valerie E. Campbell. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 7/18/2011. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2011)

Case3:06-cv-02225-CRB Document57

1
2
3
4
5

Filed07/14/11 Page1 of 3

ERIK G. BABCOCK, SBN 172517
LAW OFFICES OF ERIK BABCOCK
1212 Broadway, Suite 726
Oakland, CA 94612
[phone] Tel.
[phone] Fax
Attorney for Petitioner
VALERIE CAMPBELL

6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

VALERIE CAMPBELL,

)
)
Petitioner-Appellant, )
)
v.
)
)
GLORIA HENRY,
)
)
Respondent-Appellee. )
)

No. CV-06-2225 CRB
RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE AND REQUEST FOR
SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME

ORDER

I, ERIK G. BABCOCK, declare as follows:
1.

Ms. Campbell filed a pro se federal habeas petition in

19
2006, which the court ultimately dismissed based on on
20
respondent’s claim in was untimely.

I was subsequently

21
appointed to represent her in the Ninth Circuit.

22

The

Ninth Circuit found her petition was timely and remanded

23
24

to this court.

25

Cause.

26

the Order to Show Cause.

27

2.

The court reinstated the Order the Show

On March 24, 2011 respondent filed a response to

On May 11, 2011 I requested 60 days in which to research

28
Response to OSC
Campbell v. Henry, No. 06cv2225 CRB

Case3:06-cv-02225-CRB Document57

Filed07/14/11 Page2 of 3

1

and file a traverse, which the court granted, giving me

2

until July 6, 2011.

3

2011, and on July 7, 2011, the court issued an order to

4

show cause why this case should not be dismissed for

5
6

I did not file a traverse by July 6,

failure to prosecute.
3.

I respectfully request that the court not dismiss this

7
case for failure to prosecute.

First, I apologize for

8
not having anything filed by July 6, 2011.

9

Although I

was not prepared to file a traverse on July 6, 2011, I

10
11

should have notified the court and requested an extension

12

of time by that date.

13

but simply neglected to do so in a timely fashion and the

14

court issued an order to show cause the next day.

15

4.

I planned to file such a request

I request an extension of time to file a traverse.

I

16

have been working on the traverse, but I have not been

17

able to complete and file a traverse yet for a variety of

18

reasons.

19
20

I have very lengthy records to review (the

record in one case alone is approximately 65 volumes in
case) and opening briefs due this summer in both Roger-

21
Lee-De-Luis-Conte v. Evans, Ninth Circuit No. 09-17048
22
and Clarke v Evans, Ninth Circuit No. 11-15232.

I spent

23
24

the better part of May getting prepared for trial in

25

United States v. Bates, No. CR 10-845 LHK on May 31. 2011

26

in which my client was facing a potential life sentence

27

for many yeas of alleged child

28

in trial in state court Eureka, California in People v.
Response to OSC
Campbell v. Henry, No. 06cv2225 CRB

molestation.

I was then

- 2 -

Case3:06-cv-02225-CRB Document57

Filed07/14/11 Page3 of 3

1

DeBerardinis

2

secretary of many years gave me notice quit effective

3

June 30, 2011.

4

very hard for me to keep up with all of my obligations.

5

the

last

part

of

June.

Finally,

my

Her notice and departure has made it

She was not just my secretary, but also my receptionist,

6

bookkeeper, billing assistant, and paralegal.

I am

7
looking for but have not yet found a new secretary, and
8
I am accordingly, having to deal with a variety of tasks

9

that I normally do not.

10
11

5.

Ms. Campbell is serving a life sentence and deserves a

12

thorough review of the record in her case.

13

will not be prejudiced by an extension of time in this

14

case.

15

6.

Respondent

I therefore request (1) that the court not dismiss

16

petitioner’s claims because of my busy schedule and

17

oversight, and (2) an extension of time to and including

18

September 6, 2011.

19
20

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true
Executed this 14th day of July, 2011 at Oakland,

and correct.

21
California.
22

H

ER

R NIA
FO

Judg

July 18, 2011

LI

RT

28

D

RDERE

yer
s R. Bre
e Charle

NO

27

OO
IT IS S

/S Erik Babcock
ERIK G. BABCOCK
Counsel for Petitioner

A

26

UNIT
ED

25

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

RT
U
O

24

S

23

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

Response to OSC
Campbell v. Henry, No. 06cv2225 CRB

C

- 3 -