From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Kaiser

United States District Court, N.D. Oklahoma
Apr 13, 2006
No. 99-CV-775-TCK-SAJ (N.D. Okla. Apr. 13, 2006)

Opinion

No. 99-CV-775-TCK-SAJ.

April 13, 2006


ORDER


On April 6, 2006, Petitioner, a state inmate appearing pro se, filed a "motion requesting relief from order denying habeas corpus in no. 99-CV-775 K (J)" (Dkt. # 39). He also filed a "notice of motion" (Dkt. # 38). On April 11, 2006, the Clerk of Court received from Petitioner a letter (Dkt. # 40) explaining that he had "inadvertently mailed" the Rule 60(b) motion for filing and requesting information on how to vacate the Rule 60(b) motion if it had already been filed.

Because the Rule 60(b) motion and the notice have been filed of record, the Court finds the letter received April 11, 2006, should be construed as a motion to withdraw the Rule 60(b) motion and notice, both filed April 6, 2006. The Court, in its discretion, finds the motion to withdraw the pleadings shall be granted. Petitioner's "notice of motion" (Dkt. # 38) and "motion requesting relief from order denying habeas corpus in no. 99-CV-775 K (J)" (Dkt. # 39) shall be stricken from the record. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's letter (Dkt. # 40), received April 11, 2006, is construed as a motion to withdraw Rule 60(b) motion and notice and is granted. Petitioner's "notice of motion" (Dkt. # 38) and "motion requesting relief from order denying habeas corpus in no. 99-CV-775 K (J)" (Dkt. # 39) are stricken from the record. This matter remains closed.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Martin v. Kaiser

United States District Court, N.D. Oklahoma
Apr 13, 2006
No. 99-CV-775-TCK-SAJ (N.D. Okla. Apr. 13, 2006)
Case details for

Martin v. Kaiser

Case Details

Full title:KEITH DALE MARTIN, Petitioner, v. STEPHEN KAISER, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Oklahoma

Date published: Apr 13, 2006

Citations

No. 99-CV-775-TCK-SAJ (N.D. Okla. Apr. 13, 2006)