Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01233/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01233-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

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

 See Pub. L. 110-199, 122 Stat. 657; 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621, 3624; chapter 153 of Title 42; 1

42 U.S.C. §§ 17501, et seq., §§ 17551 et seq., and subchapters XV-A, XV-B, and XX-A of

chapter 46 of Title 42, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 3797q et seq., 3797s et seq., and 3797dd et seq. 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MAX C. TANNER,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-1233 FCD GGH P

vs.

KUMA DEBOO, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. By Order, filed on 3/21/08, a stay in this matter

was imposed, pending adjudication of Rodriguez v. Smith, C.A. No. 07-16014, Civ. No. 07-0190

LJO DLB HC, now on appeal in the Ninth Circuit. Respondent was directed to inform the court

of the appellate court’s decision in Rodriguez, supra, within five days of the ruling in that matter.

Petitioner now brings a request for leave to supplement and modify his petition (#

19), in light of the April 9, 2008, enactment of the Second Chance Act of 2007. Petitioner failed 1

to submit a proposed amended petition with his request. Petitioner’s defective request is denied

Case 2:07-cv-01233-FCD-CHS Document 20 Filed 06/30/08 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

2

without prejudice. Should petitioner seek leave to lift the stay and proceed on an amended

petition relying on the Second Chance Act of 2007, and no longer on the BOP regulation

implicated by Rodriguez, supra, the basis upon which the stay was granted, he may file a motion

to lift the stay along with an amended petition without reference to the issues raised in the

original petition, within thirty days. Should he seek leave to amend the petition after the stay in

this matter is lifted following the Ninth Circuit’s adjudication of Rodriquez, he may do so at that

time, raising each and every ground upon which he wishes to proceed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 06/30/08

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

tann1233.ord

Case 2:07-cv-01233-FCD-CHS Document 20 Filed 06/30/08 Page 2 of 2