MEGELA v. CAPOZZA et al
Filing
10
ORDER denying 7 Motion for Discovery albeit without prejudice to being refiled but only afte the Answer has been filed. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 11-5-2014. A copy of the Order together with this Notice of Electronic Filing are being mailed to Petitioner at his address of record via first class mail. (tmr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BRADLEY A. MEGELA,
Petitioner,
vs.
MARK CAPOZZA Superintendent S.C.I.
Pittsburgh; LLOYD A. WHITE Chairman,
PA Bd. of Prob. And Parole; KATHLEEN
KANE The Attorney General of the State of
Pennsylvania,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 14-1335
Chief Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly
Re: ECF No. 7
ORDER
Bradley A. Megela (“Petitioner”) is a state prisoner who has filed a Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the two most recent denials of his
re-parole application. He has also filed a Motion for Discovery. ECF No. 7.
The Motion For Discovery is denied as being pre-maturely filed as the Petition has not
been served yet nor has an Answer been filed. The denial of the Motion For Discovery is
without prejudice to being filed again but only after the Answer has been filed.
In accordance with the Magistrate Judges Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and Rule 72.C.2 of
the Local Rules of Court, the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order to
file an appeal to the District Judge which includes the basis for objection to this Order. Any
appeal is to be submitted to the Clerk of Court, United States District Court, 700 Grant Street,
Room 3110, Pittsburgh, PA 15219. Failure to file a timely appeal will constitute a waiver of any
appellate rights.
s/Maureen P. Kelly
MAUREEN P. KELLY
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Date: November 5, 2014
cc:
Bradley A. Megela
GQ-1195
S.C.I. Pittsburgh
P.O. Box 99991
Pittsburgh, PA 15233-0991
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?