Williams v. Hedgpeth
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 1, 2010
ORDER denying 8 Motion for Extension of Time and Directing entry of final judgment. This action remains Dismissed without prejudice for the reasons set forth in the Court's December 1, 2009 Order of dismissal. Petitioner remains free to prese nt his claims in a new action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, or 42 U.S.C. § 1983, if he wishes, which will be given a separate civil case number. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 3/1/10. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lao) (jrl).
|December 1, 2009
ORDER Dismissing Case without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement and failure to allege exhaustion of state court remedies. If Petitioner wishes to proceed with this habeas action, he must satisfy the filing fee requirement an d file a First Amended Petition which cures the defects identified in this Order on or before January 11, 2009. The dismissal is also without prejudice to Petitioner to file a separate civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, if he wishes, which will be given a separate civil case number. Signed by Judge Dana M. Sabraw on 12/1/09. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lao) (av1).
|November 16, 2009
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 11/12/2009. (Bradley, A) [Transferred from California Eastern on 11/19/2009.]
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?