IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 10, 2009
TIMOTHY DONALD HERTZIG, PETITIONER,
JAMES YATES, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pending before the court is Petitioner's motion for judgment ruling (Doc. 17).
Petitioner is requesting the court entertain his petition without waiting for Respondent to respond. He argues the Respondent has not responded within the original 60 days the court allowed, and the court should therefore proceed with hearing his petition ex parte. He also objects to any extension of time.
Respondent was originally ordered to respond within 60 days of the order issued March 26, 2009. However, prior to receiving Petitioner's motion, Respondent had requested additional time to file a response. Respondent's request for an additional 15 days to file his response was granted. Respondent therefore has until June 10, 2009 to file his response. Therefore, the court declines to consider Petitioner's petition ex parte, and will wait for the response from Respondent. Petitioner will have time to file his traverse after the response is filed.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's motion for judgment ruling (Doc. 17) is denied.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.