Steven Eric Gould v. People of The State of California et al
Steven Eric Gould |
Craig Koenig and People of The State of California |
8:2018cv01821 |
October 11, 2018 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Jesus G Bernal |
Jacqueline Chooljian |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 27, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian, ORDERING Exhibits C-1 through C-8; Request to Scan/Enter Exhibits submitted by Petitioner Steven Eric Gould received on 11/27/2018 is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: (See document for further details. (yl) |
Filing 9 Opposition and Objection to Respondents Request for an Extension of Time to File an Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus #1 #7 filed by Petitioner Steven Eric Gould. (sp) |
Filing 8 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian: #7 Respondent's motion for an extension of time to file the Answer is granted. Respondent shall file the Answer on or before January 18, 2019. Petitioner may file a Reply on or before February 17, 2019. (klg) |
Filing 7 APPLICATION to Extend Time to File Answer to 1/18/2019 re Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) #1 filed by Respondent Craig Koenig. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Beesley, Christopher) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Christopher P Beesley on behalf of Respondent Craig Koenig (Beesley, Christopher) |
Filing 5 ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS BY A PERSON IN STATE CUSTODY by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. that Respondent People of The State of California file Answer to the Petition not later than 11/19/2018. 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 11/19/2018. Traverse due by 12/19/2018 (Attachments: #1 Attachment 1, #2 Attachment 2) (sbou) |
Filing 4 (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REGARDING REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. All future documents submitted in this case should be addressed to: "Clerk, U.S. District Court, Edward R. Roybal Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Room 180 (Terrace Level), Los Angeles, CA 90012-1565." (See document for further details.) (sbou) |
Filing 3 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian, 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 Steven Eric Gould. 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 Steven Eric Gould. Case assigned to Judge Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. (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
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.