Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01073/USCOURTS-casd-3_06-cv-01073-0/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

06cv1073-BEN (BLM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J.D. MARTIN,

Petitioner,

v.

A.P. KANE, Warden,

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 06cv1073-BEN (BLM)

ORDER SETTING DEADLINE FOR

PETITIONER’S OPPOSITION TO

RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

On August 1, 2006, the Court issued an Order Reopening Case and

Setting Briefing Schedule on the instant Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus. Doc. No. 7. On September 6, 2006, Respondent filed an ex parte

application requesting a thirty-day extension of time to file an Answer

to that Petition. Doc. No 8. The Court granted Respondent’s ex parte

application that same day, extending Respondent’s Answer deadline to

October 9, 2006 and ordering Petitioner to file his Traverse no later

than thirty days after service of Respondent’s Answer. Doc. No. 9. As

Respondent’s ex parte application sought no extension of the deadlines

related to motions to dismiss, no such extension was given.

On October 10, 2006, however, Respondent submitted for filing a

Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss. Nevertheless, the Court

Case 3:06-cv-01073-BEN-BLM Document 12 Filed 11/21/06 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 06cv1073-BEN (BLM)

accepted Respondent’s motion for filing. Doc. No. 11. To date,

Petitioner has not filed an Opposition to Respondent’s Motion, and, as

noted above, no extended deadline for Petitioner’s Opposition has been

set.

Accordingly, Petitioner shall file his Opposition, if any, to

Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss no later than December 22, 2006.

Petitioner’s Opposition shall not address the merits of his claims for

habeas relief, but rather shall address all grounds upon which

Respondent contends dismissal without reaching the merits of

Petitioner’s claims is warranted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 21, 2006

BARBARA L. MAJOR

United States Magistrate Judge

COPY TO: 

HONORABLE ROGER T. BENITEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ALL COUNSEL

Case 3:06-cv-01073-BEN-BLM Document 12 Filed 11/21/06 Page 2 of 2