Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00728/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-00728-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jesus Aleman
Petitioner
CDCR
Respondent

Document Text:

1

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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding in propria persona with a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

The instant petition was filed on May 15, 2014. (Doc. 1). On May 23, 2014, the Court ordered 

Respondent to file a response to the petition. (Doc. 5). Respondent filed his Answer on August 27, 

2014. (Doc. 13). On October 1, 2014, Petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file his 

Traverse. (Doc. 15). On October 7, 2014, Petitioner filed a second request for extension of time to 

file the Traverse, despite the fact that the previous motion had not yet been ruled upon. (Doc. 16). On 

the same date, Petitioner filed a motion for issuance of an order directing Respondent to facilitate 

communication between Petitioner and his “jailhouse lawyer.” (Doc. 17). 

Because the second motion for extension of time was redundant, the Court will disregard it. 

Because the Court’s habeas jurisdiction does not extend to issues relating to the conditions of 

Petitioner’s confinement, e.g., how the prison handles Petitioner’s mail or contact between inmates, 

JESUS ALEMAN,

 Petitioner,

v.

DIRECTOR OF CDCR,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-00728-JLT

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION 

FOR ORDER (Doc. 17)

ORDER DISREGARDING PETITIONER’S 

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME (Doc. 16)

Case 1:14-cv-00728-LJO-JLT Document 19 Filed 10/17/14 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

the Court will deny Petitioner’s motion for issuance of an order directing Respondent to facilitate 

communication with the jailhouse lawyer.

ORDER

For the foregoing reasons, the Court HEREBY ORDERS as follows:

1. Petitioner’s motion for extension of time (Doc. 16), is DISREGARDED; and,

2. Petitioner’s motion for order (Doc. 17), is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 16, 2014 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00728-LJO-JLT Document 19 Filed 10/17/14 Page 2 of 2