Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05882/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-05882-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Oscar Reynaldo Gomez
Petitioner
State of California
Respondent

Document Text:

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

cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OSCAR REYNALDO GOMEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:04-cv-05882-AWI-TAG HC

ORDER VACATING ORDER TO SHOW

CAUSE WHY THE PETITION FOR HABEAS

CORPUS SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT’S

ORDER

(Doc. 15)

ORDER VACATING ORDER DENYING

MOTION TO AMEND PETITION (Doc. 15)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND

(Doc. 13)

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On June 23, 2004, Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas

corpus in this Court. (Doc. 1). 

On February 22, 2005, the Court issued an Order requiring Petitioner to amend the instant

Petition to name a proper respondent. (Doc. 12). In that Order, the Court pointed out that a

petitioner seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 must name the state officer

having custody of him as the respondent to the petition. In the order, the Court granted Petitioner

leave to correct this defect through a motion to amend the petition to include the proper

respondent. (Doc. 12). On March 1, 2005, Petitioner filed a motion to amend or correct the

 //

Case 1:04-cv-05882-AWI-TAG Document 16 Filed 05/12/05 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

cd 2

respondent to name James Yates, the present warden of Pleasant Valley State Prison, Coalinga,

California, the prison in which Petitioner was then incarcerated. (Doc. 13). 

On May 6, 2005, the Court issued an order to show cause why the Petition should not be

dismissed for Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s order to file an amended petition.

(Doc. 15). In that order, the Court also denied Petitioner’s motion to amend. (Id.). The Court

has re-examined Petitioner’s motion to amend and determined that Petitioner was complying

with the Court’s previous order of February 22, 2005. 

In light of the foregoing, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows:

1. The Court’s Order to Show Cause dated May 6, 2005 (Doc. 15), is VACATED; 

2. The Court’s Order Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Amend dated May 6, 2005 (Doc.

15), is VACATED; and

3. Petitioner’s Motion to Amend dated March 1, 2005 (Doc. 13) is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2005 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-05882-AWI-TAG Document 16 Filed 05/12/05 Page 2 of 2