Reed v. Wolfenbarger

Filing 23

ORDER denying 18 Motion to Dismiss/Strike; denying 20 and 21 Motions for Oral Argument. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER B. REED,
Petitioner,

Civil No. 08-11045
Honorable John Corbett O’Meara
United States District Judge

v.
HUGH WOLFENBARGER,
Respondent.
/

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO STRIKE RESPONDENT’S ANSWER
[DKT. 18] AND MOTIONS FOR ORAL ARGUMENT [DKTS. 20 AND 21]
Christopher Reed, (“Petitioner”), a state prisoner, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 29, 2009, this Court entered an opinion and
order holding the case in abeyance pending the completion of state post-conviction proceedings.
After exhausting his state court remedies, the case was reopened by order dated August 15, 2012.
The order reopening the case required Respondent to file a responsive pleading and any additional
Rule 5 materials by November 12, 2012. Respondent filed its answer and the Rule 5 material on
November 9, 2012.
Petitioner moves to strike Respondent’s answer based on his erroneous belief that it was due
on October 31, 2012. The order reopening the case specifically set November 12, 2012, as the
deadline for Respondent’s answer. Accordingly, the motion to strike is denied.
Petitioner also moves for oral argument on his petition. Although courts do not typically
grant oral argument when a party is in custody, a court has discretion to do so. See E.D. Mich. L.R.
7.1(f)(1). As stated, Respondent's Answer and the Rule 5 materials were filed on November 9, 2012.

1

The Court has not yet had an opportunity to review those documents. If after reviewing those
materials, as well as filings from Petitioner, the Court believes oral argument would be beneficial,
then it will be scheduled. However, it would be premature to schedule oral argument at this time.
Accordingly, the Court will deny the Motion for Oral Argument without prejudice. No additional
Motions need to be filed with respect to this issue.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED Petitioner’s motion to strike [dkt. 18] is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s motions for oral argument [dkts. 20 and 21]
are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

s/John Corbett O'Meara
United States District Judge
Date: December 28, 2012

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties of record
on this date, December 28, 2012, using the ECF system and/or ordinary mail.

s/William Barkholz
Case Manager

2