UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 7, 2012
TIMOTHY JAMES STANBROUGH,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO AMEND, DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO FILE LODGED AMENDED PETITION DATED DECEMBER 30, 2011, AND GRANTING RESPONDENT AN ADDITIONAL THIRTY DAYS TO RESPOND
Petitioner is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
Petitioner filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus on December 6, 2011 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. On December 9, 2011, the petition was transferred to this Court.
On December 22, 2011, the Court ordered Respondent to file a response to the petition within sixty days.
On December 30, 2011, Petitioner filed a motion to amend the petition, along with a proposed amended petition which was lodged by the Court. In his motion, Petitioner states that he is seeking to amend the petition to elaborate on the factual details in support of the claims raised in the original petition.
Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
(A) 21 days after serving it; or
(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e) or (f), whichever is earlier.
At this juncture, Petitioner may amend the petition as a matter of course and his motion shall be granted.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY GRANTED that:
1. Petitioner's motion to amend is GRANTED;
2. the Clerk of Court is directed to file the amended petition lodged on December 30, 2011; and
3. Respondent is granted an additional thirty days from the date set forth in the Court's December 22, 2011, order to respond to the amended petition.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.