Banchich v. Lopez
| Paul Banchich |
| Raul Lopez |
| 2:2011cv00336 |
| February 7, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Los Angeles |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Garland E. Burrell |
| General |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| 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
51
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 3/8/2013 RECOMMENDING that respondent's 36 motion to dismiss be granted. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/19/12 ORDERING that 42 Motion is DENIED without prejudice; the October 15, 2012 order 44 is VACATED, and respondent is relieved of the obligation to respond thereto; and Respondent shall file a reply to the October 15, 2012 opposition within seven days from the date of this order.(Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
44
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/15/12 ORDERING that Counsel for respondent shall inquire as to the status of petitioners access to the law library at California State Prison, Corcoran, and shall, within fourteen days from t he date of this order, file a declaration addressing petitioners access; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Litigation Coordinator, California State Prison, Corcoran, P.O. Box 3461, Corcoran, CA 93212. (Dillon, M)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 9/18/2012 ORDERING that petitioner's 35 and 40 motions to grant the petition are DENIED; and petitioner shall file an opposition to the 8/30/2012 motion to dismiss on or before 10/15/2012, respondent's reply due 7 days thereafter. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 05/01/12 ordering that petitioner is granted 1 final 30 day period in which to file an amended petition that complies with the 01/09/12 order. (Plummer, M)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/6/2012 ORDERING that respondent's 13 motion to dismiss is GRANTED; petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED with leave to amend within 30 days. (Yin, K)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/11/11 ORDERING that petitioner shall submit, within 30 days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee; Clerk of the Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district.(Dillon, 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
| Search for this case: Banchich v. Lopez | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Paul Banchich | |
| 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: Raul Lopez | |
| Represented By: | Maria G. Chan |
| 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.
