Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01253/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01253-2/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 An amended petition is currently due on or before April 13, 2006. 

1

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALLEN DESHAWN FARMER,

Petitioner,

v.

RICHARD KIRKLAND, Warden

Respondent.

 /

CV F 05-1253 OWW DLB HC

ORDER REGARDING RESPONDENT’S

FILING OF ANSWER TO PETITION AND

DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO SERVE

COPY OF ORDER ON ATTORNEY

GENERAL

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On January 3, 2006, the Court directed Respondent to submit a response to the instant

petition. However, on February 17, 2006, and March 1, 2006, Petitioner filed “supplemental

briefs” in which it appeared to the Court that Petitioner was attempting to amend the instant

petition. (Court Docs. 10, 11.) Therefore, on March 14, 2006, pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court issued an order vacating the January 3, 2006, order

directing Respondent to submit a response to the petition, and granted Petitioner thirty days in

which to file an amended petition. (Court Doc. 12.) However, a review of the Court’s docket

1

indicates that Respondent was inadvertently never served with a copy of the Court’s March 14,

2006, order, and therefore filed an answer to the petition on March 29, 2006. (Court Doc. 13.) 

Although, in light of the Court’s March 14, 2006, order, no answer was currently due or

Case 1:05-cv-01253-OWW -DLB Document 18 Filed 04/10/06 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 If an amended petition is not filed by Petitioner, the Court will issue a further order granting Petitioner 2

time to file a traverse to Respondent’s answer to the original petition. 

2

contemplated by the Court, because Respondent has filed an answer to the initial petition, and it

is unclear at this juncture whether Petitioner will file an amended petition, the Court will allow

the answer to remain on the docket, until the posture of the case is resolved. Petitioner is advised

that no response to the answer need be filed prior to filing an amended petition, and Respondent

need not file an answer to the amended petition, if one is filed, unless and until directed to do so

by the Court. The Clerk of Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Attorney 2

General. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: April 6, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01253-OWW -DLB Document 18 Filed 04/10/06 Page 2 of 2