IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 6, 2010
JONATHAN CROMP, PETITIONER,
KEN CLARK, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The original petition was filed on August 6, 2008. An answer was filed on June 1, 2009. On June 29, 2009, petitioner filed a motion to dismiss or amend his original petition, in order to add new claims. That motion was denied without prejudice on January 15, 2010, by the prior magistrate judge assigned to this case, as petitioner had not provided a copy of the proposed amended petition as required by Local Rule 220.
On March 4, 2010, petitioner filed a motion for an extension of time until March 15, 2010, to file his amended petition. The undersigned granted petitioner the extension and ordered the amended petition filed by March 15, 2010. Several weeks have passed since the March 15, 2010 deadline and petitioner has not filed an amended petition or otherwise contacted the court.
Petitioner has been granted several opportunities to file a proposed amended petition but has failed to file an amended petition with the court. The court cannot wait indefinitely for petitioner to submit his filing. The original petition was filed in August 2008 and respondent filed an answer in June 2009. As petitioner has not abided by the court's order, petitioner will not be permitted to file an amended petition. Petitioner will be granted 21 days from the service of this order to file a reply to respondent's answer. If no reply is filed in that time, the petition will be deemed submitted.
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner has 21 days from the date of service of this order to file a reply. If no reply is filed by that time, the petition will be deemed submitted.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.