|
GPO
Jun 27 2011
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/24/11 ORDERING that Petitioner submit within 30 days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; petitioner's failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action; and the Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district. (Meuleman, A)
|
|
GPO
Aug 16 2011
[VACATED pursuant to 9 Order] ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/15/11: This action is dismissed without prejudice. (Kaminski, H) Modified on 9/7/2011 (Dillon, M).
|
|
GPO
Sep 07 2011
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/6/11 ORDERING that petitioners 7 motion for reconsideration is granted. The 5 and 6 Order and Judgment are VACATED; Petitioners 8 application to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED; Petitioner shall, within 30 days after service of this order, file one of the following: a statement that petitioner is pursuing in this action only Ground One, as set forth in his initially-filed petition; OR an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus that clearly identifies each of petitioners current claims. Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a blank form used in this district for filing a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Dillon, M)
|
|
GPO
Jun 04 2012
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 6/1/2012 ORDERING that within 14 days, respondent shall file and serve a supplemental brief that substatively addresses petitioner's challenge to the 6/9/09 decision of the Board, denying petitioner parole; petitioner may, within 14 days after service of the supplemental brief, file and serve a respose thereto. (Yin, K)
|
|
GPO
Jul 13 2012
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/12/12 RECOMMENDING that respondents motions to dismiss 18, 21, should be granted; Petitioners federal due process challenge to the June 9, 2009 decision of the Board of Parole Hearings, should be dismissed; Petitioners federal ex post facto challenge to the Boards five-year deferral of a subsequent parole hearing, should be dismissed without prejudice; and this court declines to assume pendent jurisdiction of petitioners state law expost facto challenge, which should also be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Dillon, M)
|