Balbuena v. Biter et al

Filing 29

ORDER REOPENING ACTION; ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 1/6/14. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
12

ALEXANDER BALBUENA,
Petitioner,

13
14

No. C 11-0228 RS (PR)
ORDER REOPENING ACTION;
ORDER SETTING BRIEFING
SCHEDULE

v.

15

MARTIN BITER, Warden, and
THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY
17 GENERAL,
16

18

Respondents.
/

19
20

The Ninth Circuit has remanded this federal habeas action to this Court so as to allow

21

petitioner to file a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) to amend the petition

22

to add a new claim, that is, whether the Miranda warnings were constitutionally inadequate.

23

The action is REOPENED, and the Clerk is directed to amend the docket accordingly and

24

notify the parties. The Court reminds the parties that the judgment and the order denying the

25

petition are still in effect.

26

Petitioner must file his Rule 60(b) motion on or before March 7, 2014. Failure to file

27

by such date will be deemed a waiver of the opportunity afforded by the remand, and the

28

action will be closed. Respondent shall file a response to petitioner’s motion on or before

1

May 7, 2014. If petitioner chooses to respond to respondent’s filing, he must do so on or

2

before June 7, 2014. The matter will be deemed submitted for decision on June 8, 2014.

3

Upon a showing of good cause, requests for a reasonable extension of time will be granted

4

provided they are filed on or before the deadline they seek to extend.

5

The Court reiterates that in indicating its willingness to entertain the motion, the

6

Court makes no comment on the merits of such a motion, or that it is inclined to grant

7

or deny it. Also, the Court is willing to consider only whether to allow amendment as to the

8

one new claim, that is, that the Miranda warnings were constitutionally inadequate. No other

9

claim(s) will be considered.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: January 6, 2014
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2