Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00577/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00577-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

MATTHEW JAMES GRIFFIN, 

 Plaintiff,

 v.

GONZALES, et al.,

 Defendants.

1:15-cv-00577-AWI-EPG (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD 

TESTIFICANDUM WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

AS MOOT

(ECF NO. 25)

Matthew James Griffin (APlaintiff@) is a former California state prisoner proceeding pro 

se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. ' 1983.1 

On January 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed what the Court construes as a motion for a Writ of 

Habeas Corpus ad Testificandum. (ECF No. 25). Plaintiff requests a Writ of Habeas Corpus 

ad Testificandum ordering the superintendent of the Alexander Correctional Institute to 

produce Plaintiff via a telephonic conference call.

The Court will deny Plaintiff’s motion, without prejudice, as moot. It is this Court’s 

procedure to issue the necessary Writs of Habeaus Corpus ad Testificandum prior to a hearing, 

conference, or trial. The Court notes that Plaintiff is incarcerated in North Carolina and thus 

intends to issue a writ for participation in Court proceedings when required. Thus, Plaintiff 

does not need to file a request for a Writ prior to a scheduled hearing, conference, or trial. 

Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion will be denied as moot. 

If the Court does not issue such a writ or Plaintiff believes something different is 

required, Plaintiff can file another motion for a specific writ related to a specific hearing in the 

 

1

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated in North Carolina.

Case 1:15-cv-00577-AWI-EPG Document 29 Filed 02/06/17 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

future.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad 

Testificandum is DENIED without prejudice as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 6, 2017 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00577-AWI-EPG Document 29 Filed 02/06/17 Page 2 of 2