From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Person v. Andrewjeski

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jun 30, 2023
3:23-cv-5434-BJR-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jun. 30, 2023)

Opinion

3:23-cv-5434-BJR-TLF

06-30-2023

ANTHONY SHRONE PERSON, Petitioner, v. MELISSA ANDREWJESKI, Respondent.


ORDER FOR SERVICE AND RESPONSE TO MOTION TO STAY, 28 U.S.C. § 2254 PETITION

Theresa L. Fricke, United States Magistrate Judge.

This is a federal habeas action filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is currently incarcerated at Coyote Ridge Corrections Center and is subject to the Court's Mandatory Electronic E-Filing Initiative pursuant to General Order 02-15 and 06-16. The Court, having reviewed petitioner's federal habeas petition, hereby finds and ORDERS as follows:

(1) The Clerk is directed to issue the Notice of Option of Consent to Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke.

(2) The Clerk shall arrange for service by email upon respondent and upon the Attorney General of the State of Washington, of copies of the petition (Dkt. 19), the Court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. 12), petitioner's motion to stay (Dkt. 15), and of this Order. The Clerk shall also direct a copy of this Order and of the Court's pro se instruction sheet to petitioner.

(3) At this time, respondent is directed to respond only to petitioner's motion to stay and abey (Dkt. 15). The Clerk is directed to note the motion for July 28, 2023; respondent shall file their response on or before July 21, 2023, and petitioner may file a reply on or before July 28, 2023.

(4) The answer will be treated in accordance with Local Rule LCR 7. Accordingly, on the face of the answer, respondent(s) shall note it for consideration on the fourth Friday after filing. Petitioner may file and serve a response not later than the Monday immediately preceding the Friday designated for consideration of the matter, and respondent(s) may file and serve a reply not later than the Friday designated for consideration of the matter.

(5) Filing by Parties, Generally

All attorneys admitted to practice before this Court are required to file documents electronically via the Court's CM/ECF system. Petitioner shall file all documents electronically. All filings must indicate in the upper right hand corner the name of the magistrate judge to whom the document is directed.

Any document filed with the Court must be accompanied by proof that it has been served upon all parties that have entered a notice of appearance in the underlying matter. Petitioner shall indicate the date the document is submitted for e-filing as the date of service.

(6) Motions

Any request for court action shall be set forth in a motion, properly filed and served. Pursuant to LCR 7(b), any argument being offered in support of a motion shall be submitted as a part of the motion itself and not in a separate document. The motion shall include in its caption (immediately below the title of the motion) a designation of the date the motion is to be noted for consideration on the Court's motion calendar.

(7) Direct Communications with District Judge or Magistrate Judge

No direct communication is to take place with the District Judge or Magistrate Judge with regard to this case. All relevant information and papers are to be directed to the Clerk.


Summaries of

Person v. Andrewjeski

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jun 30, 2023
3:23-cv-5434-BJR-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jun. 30, 2023)
Case details for

Person v. Andrewjeski

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY SHRONE PERSON, Petitioner, v. MELISSA ANDREWJESKI, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jun 30, 2023

Citations

3:23-cv-5434-BJR-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jun. 30, 2023)