Williams v. Baker et al

Filing 46

ORDER denying Petitioner's ECF No. 44 Motion Requesting Judicial Review and Action. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/24/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7

***

8
9
10

MATHEW LEE WILLIAMS,

Case No. 3:16-cv-00505-MMD-VPC
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.

11
12
13

BRIAN E. WILLIAMS SR., et al.,
Respondents.

14
15
16

This action is a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254, by Mathew Lee Williams, a Nevada prisoner.

17

On July 21, 2017, Williams filed a “Motion Requesting Judicial Review and Action”

18

(ECF No. 44). In that motion, Williams asks the Court to review his amended habeas

19

petition and take judicial action upon it.

20

The scheduling order in this case (ECF No. 38) requires respondents to respond

21

to Williams’ amended petition by September 28, 2017. (See Order entered June 30, 2017

22

(ECF No. 38) at 4.) Beyond that, the scheduling order states:

23
24
25

It is further ordered that if respondents file an answer, petitioner will have
sixty (60) days from the date on which the answer is served on him to file
and serve a reply. If respondents file a motion to dismiss, petitioner shall
have 60 days from the date on which the motion is served on him to file and
serve a response to the motion to dismiss, and respondents shall,
thereafter, have thirty (30) days to file a reply in support of the motion.

26
27

(Id.) This schedule will control the further proceedings in this case. The question of the

28

merits of the claims in Williams’ habeas petition is not yet before the Court.

1
2

It is therefore ordered that petitioner’s Motion Requesting Judicial Review and
Action (ECF No. 44) is denied.

3
4

DATED THIS 24th day of July 2017.

5
6

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2