United States District Court, N.D. California
January 21, 2004.
In re: WAYNE SCHICK, Petitioner
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MAXINE CHESNEY, District Judge
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This action consists entirely of a "Motion for Extension of Time to
File Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus," by which petitioner seeks to
toll the statute of limitations in order to file a federal habeas
petition in the future. Article III, Section 2 of the United States
Constitution restricts adjudication in federal courts to "Cases" and
"Controversies." See Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans
United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471
(1982). In the absence of an actual petition for a writ of habeas corpus
or other civil complaint, there is no case or controversy for this Court
to adjudicate. Moreover, the Court cannot discern from the filing herein
whether petitioner can meet even the most basic requirements for
proceeding with a habeas petition in this Court, such as jurisdiction and
venue. Finally, petitioner may seek relief from the statute of
limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) once he files a petition in
federal court. The Court cannot provide such relief prospectively where,
as here, no petition exists.
Accordingly, the above-entitled action is hereby DISMISSED without
prejudice to petitioner's filing a petition for a writ of habeas corpus
or a complaint for other relief.
This order terminates all pending motions. The Clerk shall close the
IT IS SO ORDERED.
JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial
by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its
[X] Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing
before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED the above-entitled action is
hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to petitioner's filing a petition
for a writ of habeas corpus or a complaint for other relief.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.