Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01456/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01456-2/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a 

petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(1), the parties have consented to the 

jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all 

further proceedings in the case, including the entry of final 

judgment, by manifesting their consent in writings signed by the 

parties or their representatives and filed by Petitioner on October 

1, 2014, and on behalf of Respondent on October 16, 2014. Pending 

VICTOR CHARLES FOURSTAR, JR.,

 Petitioner,

v.

PAUL COPENHAVER,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:14-cv-01456-BAM-HC

ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO FILE 

OPPOSITION OR NOTICE OF NONOPPOSITION TO PETITIONER’S MOTION 

TO AMEND THE PETITION WITHIN THIRTY 

(30) DAYS (DOC. 15)

ORDER SCHEDULING REPLY

DEADLINE: THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER 

SERVICE OF OPPOSITION

ORDER SUSPENDING DEADLINE FOR 

PETITIONER’S FILING OF A TRAVERSE 

TO THE FIRST AMENDED ANSWER

Case 1:14-cv-01456-SKO Document 23 Filed 01/07/15 Page 1 of 2
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

before the Court is Petitioner’s motion to amend the petition (doc. 

15), which was filed on December 1, 2014. Respondent has not filed 

opposition or notice of non-opposition to the motion.

A court has inherent power to control its docket and the 

disposition of its cases with economy of time and effort for both 

the court and the parties. Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 

248, 254-255 (1936); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th 

Cir. 1992). The Court has determined that in view of the lengthy 

history of Petitioner’s attempts to add matters to the petition,

input from Respondent would be helpful to put Petitioner’s latest 

motion in the context of the entire proceeding and to achieve an 

informed disposition of the motion. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1) Respondent shall FILE either opposition or notice of nonopposition to Petitioner’s motion to amend the petition no later 

than thirty (30) days after the date of service of this order; and 

2) Petitioner may FILE a reply to any opposition filed by 

Respondent no later than thirty (30) days after the date of service 

of any opposition on Petitioner; and

3) Pending further order of the Court, the deadline for 

Petitioner’s filing of a traverse to the First Amended Answer filed 

on December 30, 2014, is SUSPENDED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 6, 2015 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe _

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01456-SKO Document 23 Filed 01/07/15 Page 2 of 2