Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00134/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00134-5/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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL URIOSTEGUI,

Petitioner,

v.

F. FOULK,

Respondent.

No. 1:13-cv-00134-LJO-SKO HC

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

OBJECTIONS AND STRIKING 

DOCUMENT 32

(Doc. 32)

The order denying Petitioner’s motion to extend time (Doc. 32) was improperly captioned. 

Accordingly, the Court hereby STRIKES Document 32 and AMENDS the caption of the prior 

order to reflect that the Court has DENIED Petitioner’s motion to extend the time in which to file 

objections. The body of the order continues to read as follows:

On March 21, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and the recommendation that the 

Court deny habeas relief in the above-captioned case. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro 

se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, requests an additional 

31-day extension of time in which to file objections to the findings and recommendations. 

Petitioner contends that because of limited access to the prison law library, he requires the 

additional time to conduct necessary legal research.

Although the Court is sympathetic to Petitioner’s limited resources, following a 60-day 

extension of time to file objections to the findings and recommendations, he has already had three 

Case 1:13-cv-00134-LJO-SKO Document 33 Filed 06/22/16 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

months to prepare and file his objections. The Court’s prior order also advised Petitioner that no 

further extensions would be granted.

Petitioner’s motion for an additional extension of time is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 22, 2016 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00134-LJO-SKO Document 33 Filed 06/22/16 Page 2 of 2