Roberts v. Kramer et al
| Jermaine Roberts |
| Matthew Kramer and Jerry Brown |
| 2:2008cv00376 |
| February 20, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Dale A. Drozd |
| Ronald S.W. Lew |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
22
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/30/09 ORDERING respondent's 06/11/09 request to substitute Warden Evans as respondent in this action 18 is granted. The clerk of the court is directed to am end the docket to reflect that Warden Michael S. Evans is the respondent in this action. Also, RECOMMENDING that respondent's 06/11/09 amended motion to dismiss be granted; and this action be closed. AMENDED MOTION to DISMISS 18 referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 20 days. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/29/09 ordering that within 20 days of the date of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondent's amended motion to dismiss and shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file a timely opposition, In the alternative, if petitioner no longer wishes to proceed with this matter he may file a request to dismiss this action. (Plummer, M)
|
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 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.
