Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00206/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-00206-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 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 was referred to the Magistrate Judge 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 through 303. 

Pending before the Court is Petitioner’s motion for clarification 

filed on April 30, 2014.

On October 17, 2013, the Court denied Petitioner’s motion for a 

stay of the proceedings to permit Petitioner to exhaust new claims. 

In the motion for clarification, Petitioner seeks information 

regarding the status of Petitioner’s old and new claims.

W. C. SPIVEY, III,

 Petitioner,

v.

CONNIE GIPSON, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:12-cv-00206-LJO-SKO-HC

ORDER DISMISSING PETITIONER’S 

MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION (DOC. 38)

Case 1:12-cv-00206-LJO-SKO Document 39 Filed 09/03/14 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The Court’s order is self-explanatory. The petition proceeds 

on Petitioner’s initially filed claims, which Respondent has 

answered, and as to which Petitioner has filed a traverse.

Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion for clarification is DISMISSED 

as moot. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 2, 2014 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:12-cv-00206-LJO-SKO Document 39 Filed 09/03/14 Page 2 of 2