Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01981/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01981-1/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

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADONAI EL-SHADDAI,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-1981 GEB GGH P

vs.

T. FELKER, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis who has

filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed on

September 20, 2006, this court directed respondent to file a response to petitioner’s habeas

petition within thirty days from the date of this order. See Rule 4, Fed. R. Governing § 2254

Cases. Respondent was directed either to file an answer, accompanied by all transcripts and

other documents relevant to the issues presented in the petition (see Rule 5, Fed. R. Governing §

2254 Cases), or a motion, within thirty days. If respondent filed a motion, petitioner was allowed

thirty days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion, after which

respondent would have fifteen days to file any reply.

On October 19, 2006, respondent filed and served a timely motion to dismiss for

failure to exhaust state court remedies. On November 15, 2006, respondent filed an amended

Case 2:06-cv-01981-AK Document 10 Filed 12/05/06 Page 1 of 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

2

certificate of service, evidently re-serving petitioner at the same address but this time providing

additional information in the address, including evidently petitioner’s building location and what

may be his prison commitment name as well, J.R. Wilkerson.

On November 22, 2006 (November 16, 2006, by application of the mailbox rule),

petitioner filed an inapposite motion for a default judgment because petitioner most likely had

not yet received the pending motion to dismiss prior to re-service. Due to the apparent delay in

receipt of the motion by petitioner, the court will deny petitioner’s motion but will grant

petitioner an extension of time to file his opposition.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s November 22, 2006, inapposite request for a default judgment is

denied; and

2. Petitioner is granted an extension of time of twenty days from the date of this

order to file an opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss, originally filed on October 19,

2006, and re-served on November 15, 2006. 

DATED: 12/04/06 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

shad1981.ord

Case 2:06-cv-01981-AK Document 10 Filed 12/05/06 Page 2 of 2