Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01253/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01253-4/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Allen Deshawn Farmer
Petitioner
Richard Kirkland
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ALLEN DESHAWN FARMER,

Petitioner,

v.

RICHARD KIRKLAND, Warden

Respondent.

 /

CV F 05-1253 OWW DLB HC

ORDER STRIKING ANSWER TO PETITION

(Doc. 13), AND DIRECTING RESPONDENT

TO SUBMIT RESPONSIVE PLEADING TO

PETITIONER’S AMENDED PETITION (Doc.

22)

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

As set forth in the Court’s April 10, 2006, order, after the Court issued an order directing

Respondent to file a response to the petition, Petitioner filed a brief in which it appeared that

Petitioner was attempting to amend the instant petition. Therefore, on March 14, 2006, the Court

vacated the January 3, 2006, order to respond, and granted Petitioner thirty days in which to file

an amended petition. Respondent was inadvertently never served with a copy of the Court’s

March 14, 2006, and therefore filed an answer to the petition on March 29, 2006. Because of the

confusion, the Court issued an order on April 10, 2006, informing Respondent that the initial

order to respond had been vacated, but the answer would nonetheless remain on the docket until

the procedural posture of the case was resolved. On April 21, 2006, Petitioner filed an amended

petition. 

Because Petitioner has now filed an amended petition, the Court will strike Respondent’s

answer to the initial petition, and direct Respondent to submit a response to the amended petition

Case 1:05-cv-01253-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 05/03/06 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

in compliance with the Court’s January 3, 2006, order. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondent’s answer filed March 29, 2006, at Court Document 13, is

STRICKEN; and

2. Respondent is directed to file a responsive pleading to Petitioner’s amended

petition, filed April 21, 2006, at Court Document 22.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 2, 2006 /s/ Dennis L. Beck 

3b142a UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01253-OWW -DLB Document 23 Filed 05/03/06 Page 2 of 2