Jason K. Davis v. B. Kibler
| Jason K. Davis |
| B. Kibler |
| 2:2021cv07620 |
| September 23, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| John D Early |
| Fernando M Olguin |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENTS APPLICATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME #6 by Magistrate Judge John D. Early. Respondent's Application for an Enlargement of Time, to and including December 11, 2021, within which to file a Motion to Dismiss, and to and including December 26, 2021, within which to file an Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, is GRANTED. (et)
|
| Filing 6 First APPLICATION for Extension of Time to File RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS; DECLARATION OF JONATHAN M. KRAUSS; [PROPOSED] ORDER filed by Respondent B. Kibler. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Krauss, Jonathan) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE of California Attorney General Office Deputy Attorney General Jonathan M. Krauss on behalf of Respondent B. Kibler. (Attorney Jonathan Matthew Krauss added to party B. Kibler(pty:res))(Krauss, Jonathan) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE Re: Filing Fee of $5.00 for Case: 2:21-cv-07620-FMO-JDE filed by Petitioner Jason K. Davis. (kh) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REQUIRING ANSWER/RETURN TO PETITION by Magistrate Judge John D. Early. That Respondent B. Kibler file Answer to the Petition not later than 11/26/2021. Notice: The court has issued a ruling on preliminary review. Pursuant to the Agreement on Acceptance of Service between the Clerk of Court and the California Attorney Generals Office, this Notice constitutes service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Motions to Dismiss shall be filed by 11/11/2021. (Attachments: #1 Petition) (mba)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Fernando M. Olguin and referred to Magistrate Judge John D. Early, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (Attachments: #1 CV-111) (lh) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In State Custody (28:2254). Case assigned to Judge Fernando M. Olguin and referred to Magistrate Judge John D. Early. (Filing Fee $5 DUE), filed by Petitioner Jason K. Davis. (lh) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Jason K. Davis v. B. Kibler | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Jason K. Davis | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: B. Kibler | |
| Represented By: | Jonathan Matthew Krauss |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
