Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-04557/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-04557-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Diego Gonzalez
Petitioner
William Knipp
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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIEGO GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

WILLIAM KNIPP,

Defendant.

Case No. 12-cv-04557-EMC 

ORDER 

Docket No. 43

On September 30, 2015, the Court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus and entered 

judgment. Petitioner has filed a motion for relief from the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 60(b)(1). Dkt. No. 43. Rule 60(b)(1) permits a party to obtain relief from a final 

judgment or order based on “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 

60(b)(1). 

Petitioner’s Rule 60(b)(1) motion fails to clearly explain the purported “mistake, 

inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect” in his case. Petitioner therefore must file a 

supplement to his motion (which should be labeled “Supplement To Rule 60(b)(1) Motion”) in 

which he more clearly identifies and explains the circumstances of each claimed instance of 

mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect that he believes warrants relief from the 

judgment. At the time he files his Supplement To Rule 60(b)(1) Motion, Petitioner also must file 

a declaration under penalty of perjury providing the following information: (1) the approximate 

date on which Petitioner received the November 17, 2014 order extending the traverse deadline, 

(2) the approximate date on which Petitioner received the order from the Ninth Circuit in Gonzalez 

v. Knipp, Ninth Circuit Case No. 14-17358, dismissing that appeal; (3) the approximate date on 

which Petitioner received the clerk’s January 16, 2015 letter spreading the mandate from the Ninth 

Case 3:12-cv-04557-EMC Document 44 Filed 11/02/15 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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

Circuit in Gonzalez v. Knipp, Ninth Circuit Case No. 14-17358, (4) the approximate date on which 

Petitioner received a copy of the docket sheet in response to his February 20, 2015 request for a 

docket sheet, and (5) a description of all Petitioner’s efforts to prepare a traverse and the date on 

which he completed his traverse. Petitioner also must file with his Supplement To Rule 60(b)(1) 

Motion a copy of his inmate mail log, showing both his outgoing and incoming mail from 

November 1, 2014 through October 15, 2015. Finally, if Petitioner has prepared a traverse, he 

should file it at the time he files the Supplement To Rule 60(b)(1) Motion. The foregoing 

materials -- i.e., the Supplement To Rule 60(b)(1) Motion, the declaration, the mail log, and the 

traverse -- must be filed and served on Respondent’s counsel no later than November 30, 2015. 

Respondent must file and serve his opposition to the Rule 60(b) motion no later than December 

31, 2015. Petitioner must file and serve his reply, if any, no later than January 15, 2016.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 2, 2015

______________________________________

EDWARD M. CHEN

United States District Judge

Case 3:12-cv-04557-EMC Document 44 Filed 11/02/15 Page 2 of 2