From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitcham v. Martel

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Oct 24, 2011
Case No. C-97-3825 JSW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. C-97-3825 JSW.

October 24, 2011

KAREN S. SCHRYVER, SB #124939, Gualala, CA, NEOMA D. KENWOOD, SB #101805, P.M.B. #414, Berkeley, California, MICHAEL G. MILLMAN, SB #45639, CALIFORNIA APPELLATE PROJECT, San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Petitioner, STEPHEN LOUIS MITCHAM.


[PROPOSED] ORDER


Having considered the unopposed motion of Petitioner to Modify the Filing Dates Re: Surreply for Claim D and good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. That Petitioner shall file a Surreply to Claim D (IAC subclaim) in his Amended Petition, not later than 60 days from the entry of this Court's Order on Petitioner's Request to Amend the Phase III Budget;

2. That Respondent shall file a Response not later than 30 days from the date of filing of Petitioner's Surreply.


Summaries of

Mitcham v. Martel

United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
Oct 24, 2011
Case No. C-97-3825 JSW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2011)
Case details for

Mitcham v. Martel

Case Details

Full title:STEPHEN LOUIS MITCHAM, Petitioner, v. MICHAEL MARTEL, Warden of California…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division

Date published: Oct 24, 2011

Citations

Case No. C-97-3825 JSW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2011)