Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_96-cv-01401/USCOURTS-caed-2_96-cv-01401-25/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 535
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Death Penalty
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Ptn for Writ of H/C - Stay of Execution

---

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

JAMES S. THOMSON

California SBN 79658

Attorney and Counselor at Law

819 Delaware Street 

Berkeley, California 94710

Telephone: (510) 525-9123

Facsimile: (510) 525-9124

JOLIE LIPSIG

Attorney at Law

California SBN 104644

1006 4th St., Suite 301

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 443-6995

Facsimile: (916) 443-7081

Attorneys for Petitioner

WILLIAM A. PROCTOR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM A. PROCTOR, ) No. CIV-S-96-1401 RBB CMK

)

Petitioner, ) DEATH PENALTY CASE

)

 )

v. ) APPLICATION AND ORDER

) FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 

)

)

ROBERT L. AYERS, Warden of )

California State Prison at San Quentin, )

)

Respondent. )

_________________________________)

This Court issued an Order on January 28, 2008. A request for reconsideration of

that order is currently due by April 15, 2008, or the order will become final. Local Rule

72-303(b). Counsel have been granted one previous sixty (60) day extension of time to file

a request for reconsideration.

Petitioner, by and through his counsel, hereby requests a forty-five (45) day

extension of time, or until May 30, 2008 in which to seek reconsideration of the January

28, 2008 Order.

Case 2:96-cv-01401-DAD-DMC Document 262 Filed 04/15/08 Page 1 of 3
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 extension of time is necessary for the following reasons:

1. The Order issued by this Court on January 28, 2008 establishes a litigation

plan for the remainder of Phase III. According to that schedule, petitioner’s objections to

this Court’s findings and recommendations on guilt phase summary judgment motions is

due on April 30, 2008. On May 5, 2008, petitioner’s request for reconsideration of the

Phase III Budget Order is also due. 

2. Counsel cannot complete all of the scheduled pleadings by their current due

dates and still fulfill pre-existing obligations in their other cases. Because of the need for

resolution of the budget issues before the next phase of litigation, counsel have devoted,

and will continue to devote, a significant amount of time to completion of the request for

reconsideration of the budget order by its May 5 due date. They will thus be unable to

complete the request for reconsideration of the scheduling order by April 15, 2008.

3. This request for an extension of time will not delay the proceedings or the

briefing schedule established by this Court in its January 28, 2008 scheduling order. The

portion of the schedule upon which petitioner currently intends to seek reconsideration

pertains only to matters that have been scheduled for September-December 2008. If the

present application is granted, the district court will still have ample time to address the

reconsideration request prior to the first scheduled due date. While counsel may need to

seek additional time to complete the objections to the findings and recommendations,

counsel are proceeding with the matters scheduled by this Court without awaiting any final

ruling on the January 28, 2008 briefing order. 

For all the reasons stated above, petitioner requests that he be granted an additional

forty-five(45) days, to and including May 30, 2008 in which to seek reconsideration of the

Case 2:96-cv-01401-DAD-DMC Document 262 Filed 04/15/08 Page 2 of 3
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

3

 January 28, 2008 Order. 

DATED: April 11, 2008

Respectfully submitted,

/s/JAMES S. THOMSON

/s/ JOLIE LIPSIG

Attorneys for Petitioner

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 14, 2008

_____________________________________

_

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:96-cv-01401-DAD-DMC Document 262 Filed 04/15/08 Page 3 of 3