IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 29, 2009
VINCENT J. BIAGAS, SR., PETITIONER,
JAMES WALKER, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
On September 9, 2009, petitioner filed objections to the August 31, 2009 order. This habeas corpus action was closed on August 31, 2009. Petitioner's filing does not appear to be one contemplated by the Federal Rules of Civil or Appellate Procedure.
If the "objection" had related to the merits of the habeas corpus petition, or disagreement with the underlying orders, the undersigned would treat it as a notice of appeal, but it does not so relate. If the "objection" had stated any colorable reason why the court's previous order could not be satisfied, the undersigned would treat it as a Fed.R.Civ.P 59 or 60 motion. However, the "objection" does not contain any colorable reason-- just a set of unsupported conclusions. The undersigned observes that petitioner's purported eyesight problem does not seem to prevent him from filing any documents which he desires to file when he desires to file them.
Therefore, this document will be placed in the file and disregarded.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.