Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01523/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01523-1/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

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIE GEORGE ERWIN, JR., )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

vs. )

)

)

JEANNE S. WOODFORD )

)

Respondent. )

)

)

___________________________________ )

CV F 06-1523 OWW WMW HC

ORDER DENYING MOTION

FOR RULING

[Doc. 5]

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On December 8, 2006, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that this matter be

assigned to a judge and be calendared for a decision within thirty (30) days. This case was

automatically assigned to both a district judge and a magistrate judge when it was transferred

to this court. Accordingly, Petitioner’s request that it be assigned to a judge is moot.

Case 1:06-cv-01523-OWW -WMW Document 7 Filed 12/15/06 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

27

28 2

The court does not have a mechanism for calendaring a matter for decision within

thirty days. The court understands Petitioner’s need and desire to have his case heard quickly

as he believes that relief is warranted. However, the court has pending before it at any given

time hundreds of habeas cases wherein each prisoner alleges that relief is warranted. Case

management at the court proceeds by the order cases are received. Due to the high volume of

such cases and the court’s diligent handling of each case, a court decision often takes time. 

Petitioner can rest assured that the court acts to resolve all pending cases in the most efficient

manner possible. Accordingly, Petitioner’s case will be heard in due course.

Based on the above, Petitioner’s motion is HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 13, 2006 /s/ William M. Wunderlich 

bl0dc4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01523-OWW -WMW Document 7 Filed 12/15/06 Page 2 of 2