Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01257/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01257-0/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAMIRO MATA TAPIA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

M.S. EVANS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-cv-01257-LJO-TAG HC 

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RESPOND

TO PETITION AND REQUEST FOR STATUS

(Doc. 7)

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On September 14, 2005, Petitioner filed the instant petition in the United States District

Court for the Northern District of California; by order of that Court, the matter was transferred to

the Eastern District of California on October 4, 2005. (Doc. 5). In his petition, Petitioner

challenges his conviction in the Tulare County Superior Court. (Id. at p. 3). On May 26, 2006,

Petitioner filed a motion to respond to the petition, in which he inquires about the status of his

petition and requests a decision thereon. (Doc. 7). 

Case management at the Court proceeds by the order cases are received. The Court is

aware of the existence of Petitioner’s case and the length of time that it has been pending.

However, due to the caseload of the Court, and the Court’s diligent handling of each individual

case, a Court decision often takes time. Petitioner’s case will be ruled on in due course. 

With respect to Petitioner’s request for a status, as noted in the Litigant Letter served on

Petitioner shortly after the filing of the Petition, the Court will not respond to individual inquires

regarding the status of a case. (Doc. 6, p. 2). Petitioner was informed that the Court would

Case 1:05-cv-01257-LJO -TAG Document 10 Filed 02/26/07 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

notify him as soon as any action is taken in his case and that as long as Petitioner keeps the Court

informed of his current address, he will receive all decisions that might affect the status of his

case. (Id.). 

Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion to respond to the petition (Doc. 7), is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2007 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:05-cv-01257-LJO -TAG Document 10 Filed 02/26/07 Page 2 of 2