UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 21, 2013
RICHARD RAY FELIZ,
DOMINGO URIBE, JR., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
) ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S ) REQUEST FOR A RULING, ASSIGNMENT, ) AND CALENDARING (DOC. 29)
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter has been referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 303. Pending before the Court is the Petitioner's request for a ruling, which was filed on January 15, 2013.
Petitioner's petition was filed on July 19, 2011. An answer was filed on October 13, 2011, and a traverse on September 18, 2012.
In the request for a ruling, Petitioner asks that the petition be assigned to a judge and calendared for a decision without appearances within thirty days. Petitioner cites to California Rules of Court, Rule 4.551(a)(3)(A), which Petitioner characterizes as requiring a ruling by the court within sixty (60) days following the filing of a habeas petition.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (Habeas Rules) govern Petitioner's petition during the course of this action in this Court; the California Rules of Court are not authoritative in this proceeding.
There are pending before the Court other habeas petitions that became ready for decision before Petitioner's became ready. The Court will consider Petitioner's petition on the merits in due course.
Accordingly, Petitioner's request for a ruling, assignment, and calendaring is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.