Cosme Miranda v. M.L. Montgomery
Cosme Miranda |
M.L. Montgomery |
5:2019cv00861 |
May 7, 2019 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Virginia A Phillips |
Gail J Standish |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 14, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 NOTICE OF LODGING filed re Return to Habeas Petition (2254), #6 (Attachments: #1 Lodgment 1 Part 1, #2 Lodgment 1 Part 2, #3 Lodgment 2, #4 Lodgment 3 Part 1, #5 Lodgment 3 Part 2, #6 Lodgment 3 Part 3, #7 Lodgment 4, #8 Lodgment 5, #9 Lodgment 6, #10 Lodgment 7, #11 Lodgment 8, #12 Lodgment 9, #13 Lodgment 10, #14 Lodgment 11, #15 Lodgment 12, #16 Lodgment 13)(Delgado-Rucci, David) |
Filing 6 Answer to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) #1 filed by Respondent M.L. Montgomery. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of the Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus)(Delgado-Rucci, David) |
Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE of California Attorney General Office David Delgado-Rucci on behalf of Respondent M.L. Montgomery. (Attorney David Delgado-Rucci added to party M.L. Montgomery(pty:res))(Delgado-Rucci, David) |
Filing 4 ORDER REQUIRING ANSWER/RETURN TO PETITION by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. that Respondent M.L. Montgomery file Answer to the Petition not later than 7/22/2019. 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 7/5/2019. (Attachments: #1 Petition) (ec) |
Filing 3 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Virginia A. Phillips and referred to Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish, 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. (jtil) |
Filing 2 ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT to Proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge Declined, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636c filed by Petitioner Cosme Miranda. The Petitioner does not consent. (jtil) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In State Custody (28:2254), filed by Petitioner Cosme Miranda. Case assigned to Judge Virginia A. Phillips and referred to Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (jtil) |
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: Cosme Miranda v. M.L. Montgomery | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner: Cosme Miranda | |
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: M.L. Montgomery | |
Represented By: | David S Delgado-Rucci |
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.