Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02168/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02168-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bobby Joe Mask
Petitioner
Daniel Paramo
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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BOBBY JOE MASK,

Petitioner,

v.

DANIEL PARAMO,

Respondent.

No. 2:15-cv-2168 MCE CKD P

ORDER

On March 1, 2016, the undersigned issued findings and recommendations addressing 

petitioner’s two motions to stay this federal habeas action and respondent’s motion to dismiss. 

(ECF No. 15.) Review by the district court is pending.

Since the findings and recommendations issued, petitioner has filed four motions and a 

proposed second amended petition. (ECF Nos. 16, 20, 23, 24 & 21.) All such filings are 

premature, as no further action is warranted in this case until the findings and recommendations 

are either adopted or rejected by the district court. Thus all petitioner’s motions will be dismissed 

without prejudice to renewal, if appropriate, at a later stage of this action.

Petitioner’s filing of frivolous motions is a burden on this court and impedes the proper 

prosecution of this action.1 Petitioner’s future filings shall be limited as set forth below, and any 

 

1

“Respondent has reviewed Petitioner’s [three] March 28th filings and has found that these 

documents contain nothing substantively new or different from Petitioner’s previous filing on 

Case 2:15-cv-02168-JKS Document 27 Filed 04/19/16 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

filings disallowed by the limiting order will be disregarded.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Petitioner’s motions at ECF Nos. 16, 20, 23, and 24 are denied as premature without 

prejudice to renewal; and

2. Petitioner may only file the following documents:

a. Any amended petition as directed by the court; 

b. One opposition to any motion filed by respondent (and clearly titled as such); 

c. Only one non-dispositive motion pending at any time. Petitioner is limited to 

one memorandum of points and authorities in support of the motion and one reply to any 

opposition; and

d. One set of objections to any future findings and recommendations.

Failure to comply with this order shall result in improperly filed documents being stricken 

from the record.

Dated: April 19, 2016

2 / mask2168.ord

 

March 4, 2016.” (ECF No. 26 at 3.) 

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-02168-JKS Document 27 Filed 04/19/16 Page 2 of 2