Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01430/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01430-1/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

PATRICK DARNELL HARRIS,

Petitioner,

v.

WARREN L. MONTGOMERY,

Respondent.

No. 1:19-cv-01430-DAD-SKO (HC)

ORDER MODIFYING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE

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

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

Petitioner filed the instant habeas petition on October 9, 2019. (Doc. 1.) On October 16, 

2019, the Court issued an order setting a briefing schedule. (Doc. 6.) On December 12, 2019, 

Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition for violation of the statute of limitations. (Doc. 

12.) After being granted an extension of time, on January 21, 2020, Petitioner filed an opposition 

to the motion. (Doc. 16.) On January 23, 2020, Respondent filed a motion for an extension of 

time to file a reply to the opposition. (Doc. 17.)

In the opposition, Counsel for Petitioner states he is currently waiting for a declaration 

from Petitioner in support of his request for equitable tolling. (Doc. 16 at p.4, fn.1.) Counsel 

states he will provide the Court and Respondent with the declaration, but he does not know when 

Case 1:19-cv-01430-DAD-SKO Document 18 Filed 01/27/20 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 declaration will be available due to Petitioner’s incarceration. (Id.) In his motion, 

Respondent states he has no objection to Petitioner’s late submission of the declaration, but he 

requests an extension of fourteen days from the date Petitioner’s declaration is served. 

In light of the foregoing, the Court will extend time to allow Petitioner to file the

declaration and for Respondent to file a reply; however, the Court cannot delay indefinitely. 

Therefore, a deadline of thirty (30) days will be set. 

ORDER

Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS:

1. Petitioner’s declaration is due thirty (30) days from the date of service of this Order; 

and

2. Respondent’s reply is due fourteen (14) days from the date of service of Petitioner’s 

declaration or the expiration of the thirty (30) day period for submission of the 

declaration, whichever occurs first.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 24, 2020 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01430-DAD-SKO Document 18 Filed 01/27/20 Page 2 of 2