Cevallos v. Cate

Cevallos v. Cate

Petitioner:	Michael Anthony Cevallos
Respondent:	Matthew Cate
Case Number:	2:2012cv01433
Filed:	May 29, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Riverside
Presiding Judge:	Dale A. Drozd
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
January 27, 2014	Filing 24 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 01/24/14 ordering petitioner' first amended petition is summarily dismissed. Petitioner's 03/13/13 motion for separation from superior court room County of Glenn 19 is denied. Petitioner 's 05/10/13 motion to preserve information 21 is denied. Petitioner's 05/31/13 motion to make respondent respond to petitioner 22 is denied. Petitioner's 07/12/13 motion to recuse magistrate judge 23 is denied. The clerk of th e court is directed to serve a copy of the amended petition filed in this case together with a copy of this order on the Attorney General of the State of California and to close this action. The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. (cc: Michael Farrell, Attorney General) (Plummer, M) (Plummer, M)
March 13, 2013	Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/12/13 ORDERING that Petitioners May 29, 2012 application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2 ), is granted; Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended petition; Petitioners June 28, 2012 document styled, Motion Advising Information (Doc. No. 5 ), is DENIED; Petitioners July 16, 2012 document styled, Motion Interrogatory [I]nformation (Doc. No. 6 ), is DENIED; Petitioners July 30, 2012 do cument styled, Motion To [E]stablish Correction (Doc. No. 7 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 13, 2012 document styled, Motion: To Preserve This Information (Doc. No. 10 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 13, 2012 document styled, Motion: This Is A Motion Of Responsibility In Realizing A Statutory Animal In The Superior Court Room (Doc. No 11 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 17, 2012 document styled, Motion For Correction (Doc. No. 12 ), is DENIED; Petitioners December 18, 2012 document styled, Motion: For Decision Entering A Judgment (Doc. No. 14 ) is DENIED; Petitioners January 18, 2013 document styled, Motion: For Discovery Of Information (Doc. No. 15 ), is DENIED; Petitioners February 22, 2013 document styled, Mo tion To Make Respondent Answer Petition (Doc. No. 16 ), is DENIED; Petitioners February 25, 2013 document styled, Motion For Correction Correcting Motion To Make Respondent Answer Petition (Doc. No. 17 ), is DENIED; Petitioner shall not file a ny further motions in this action until the court has had the opportunity to review any amended habeas petition he elects to file in this action and the court has issued an order directing respondent(s) to file a response thereto; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to provide petitioners with the courts form petition for a writ of habeas corpus.(Dillon, M)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 27, 2014

Filing 24 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 01/24/14 ordering petitioner' first amended petition is summarily dismissed. Petitioner's 03/13/13 motion for separation from superior court room County of Glenn 19 is denied. Petitioner 's 05/10/13 motion to preserve information 21 is denied. Petitioner's 05/31/13 motion to make respondent respond to petitioner 22 is denied. Petitioner's 07/12/13 motion to recuse magistrate judge 23 is denied. The clerk of th e court is directed to serve a copy of the amended petition filed in this case together with a copy of this order on the Attorney General of the State of California and to close this action. The court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. (cc: Michael Farrell, Attorney General) (Plummer, M) (Plummer, M)

March 13, 2013

Filing 18 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/12/13 ORDERING that Petitioners May 29, 2012 application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 2 ), is granted; Petitioner is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended petition; Petitioners June 28, 2012 document styled, Motion Advising Information (Doc. No. 5 ), is DENIED; Petitioners July 16, 2012 document styled, Motion Interrogatory [I]nformation (Doc. No. 6 ), is DENIED; Petitioners July 30, 2012 do cument styled, Motion To [E]stablish Correction (Doc. No. 7 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 13, 2012 document styled, Motion: To Preserve This Information (Doc. No. 10 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 13, 2012 document styled, Motion: This Is A Motion Of Responsibility In Realizing A Statutory Animal In The Superior Court Room (Doc. No 11 ), is DENIED; Petitioners September 17, 2012 document styled, Motion For Correction (Doc. No. 12 ), is DENIED; Petitioners December 18, 2012 document styled, Motion: For Decision Entering A Judgment (Doc. No. 14 ) is DENIED; Petitioners January 18, 2013 document styled, Motion: For Discovery Of Information (Doc. No. 15 ), is DENIED; Petitioners February 22, 2013 document styled, Mo tion To Make Respondent Answer Petition (Doc. No. 16 ), is DENIED; Petitioners February 25, 2013 document styled, Motion For Correction Correcting Motion To Make Respondent Answer Petition (Doc. No. 17 ), is DENIED; Petitioner shall not file a ny further motions in this action until the court has had the opportunity to review any amended habeas petition he elects to file in this action and the court has issued an order directing respondent(s) to file a response thereto; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to provide petitioners with the courts form petition for a writ of habeas corpus.(Dillon, 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: Cevallos v. Cate
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Michael Anthony Cevallos
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: Matthew Cate
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?