Deo v. Martel

Deo v. Martel

Petitioner:	Ravind Roushan Deo
Respondent:	M. Martel
Case Number:	2:2008cv03145
Filed:	December 29, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Habeas Corpus (General) Office
County:	Amador
Presiding Judge:	Dale A. Drozd
Nature of Suit:	None
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
November 2, 2009	Filing 19 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/30/09 recommending that respondent's 05/07/09 motion to dismiss 14 be granted; and petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies. MOTION to DISMISS filed by M. Martel 14 and petition 1 referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell. Objections due within 20 days. (Plummer, M) Modified on 11/3/2009 (Plummer, M).
July 15, 2009	Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/14/09 ordering the court's 06/16/09 order to show cause 16 is discharged. Petitioner's 06/29/09 motion for clarification 17 is granted. Within 30 days of the date of service of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss. (Plummer, M)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 2, 2009

Filing 19 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 10/30/09 recommending that respondent's 05/07/09 motion to dismiss 14 be granted; and petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed for failure to exhaust state court remedies. MOTION to DISMISS filed by M. Martel 14 and petition 1 referred to Judge Frank C. Damrell. Objections due within 20 days. (Plummer, M) Modified on 11/3/2009 (Plummer, M).

July 15, 2009

Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 07/14/09 ordering the court's 06/16/09 order to show cause 16 is discharged. Petitioner's 06/29/09 motion for clarification 17 is granted. Within 30 days of the date of service of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss. (Plummer, M)

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: Deo v. Martel
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Ravind Roushan Deo
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. Martel
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?