Ramirez v. Department of Corrections, California
Petitioner: Erik Daniel Ramirez
Respondent: Department of Corrections, California
Case Number: 1:2017cv00082
Filed: January 19, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Fresno Office
County: Kern
Presiding Judge: Lawrence J. O'Neill
Presiding Judge: Michael J. Seng
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER DENYING AS MOOT 12 Application for Enlargement of Time to File an Answer to the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 3/20/2017. (Jessen, A)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ramirez v. Department of Corrections, California
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Erik Daniel Ramirez
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: Department of Corrections, California
Represented By: Charity Seraph Whitney
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.


Why Is My Information Online?