Cooley v. Campbell

Full title: RONALD WAYNE COOLEY, Petitioner, v. ROSANNE CAMPBELL, et al., Respondents

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Aug 30, 2006

No. CIV S-05-0870 FCD DAD P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 30, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-0870 FCD DAD P.

August 30, 2006

ORDER

DALE DROZD, Magistrate Judge

On April 19, 2006, the pro se petitioner's February 2, 2006 motion for stay and abeyance was denied due to his failure to make the showing required by Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005). Petitioner was granted thirty days to file and serve a new motion for stay and abeyance, and respondents were directed to file their opposition or a statement of non-opposition within thirty days after the motion was served. Petitioner served his renewed motion on May 16, 2006, but titled the motion "Response to the Court's Order Issued Regarding Stay in Abeyance the Instant Proceedings."

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Respondents' opposition or statement of non-opposition to petitioner's renewed motion for stay and abeyance shall be filed and served within thirty days after this order is filed; and

2. Petitioner's reply to any opposition shall be filed and served within twenty days after the opposition is served.