From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 9, 2009
No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2009)

Opinion

No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P.

September 9, 2009


ORDER


Petitioner has requested an extension of time to file and serve objections to the findings and recommendations issued by the court in this case on August 17, 2009. The court will grant petitioner's request in part. Petitioner is advised that the purpose of the objections is to inform the court of "those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(C). The purpose of such objections is not to provide the parties an opportunity to conduct additional research and present new arguments that were not included in the motion heard by the assigned magistrate judge. Finally, a legal brief and attachments in support of the objections is not required.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner's September 3, 2009 motion for an extension of time (Doc. No. 128) is granted in part;

2. Petitioner shall file and serve his objections to the August 17, 2009 findings and recommendations, if any, on or before September 23, 2009. No further extensions of time will be granted for this purpose; and

3. No reply by respondent to petitioner's objections is required unless further ordered by the court.


Summaries of

Moore v. Horel

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 9, 2009
No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2009)
Case details for

Moore v. Horel

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS EUGENE MOORE, Petitioner, v. ROBERT HOREL, Warden, Respondent

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

Date published: Sep 9, 2009

Citations

No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2009)