From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Janecka

United States District Court, D. New Mexico
May 15, 2009
No. CV 09-0174 RB/LAM (D.N.M. May. 15, 2009)

Opinion

No. CV 09-0174 RB/LAM.

May 15, 2009


ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S DISCOVERY MOTIONS AS PREMATURE


THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner's Motion to Conduct Limited Discovery ( Doc. 10), filed on May 6, 2009, and his Request to Produce Documents and Tangible Things ( Doc. 11), filed on May 6, 2009, which the Court construes as a motion. In his motions, Petitioner asks the Court for leave to conduct discovery in this habeas corpus proceeding brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Having reviewed both motions, the record of this case and relevant law, the Court FINDS that the motions should be DENIED without prejudice, as premature, for the reasons set forth below.

The Court, based on a showing of good cause, may authorize Petitioner to conduct discovery in this proceeding under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Rules 1(b) and 6(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. In addition to a showing of good cause, to obtain leave to conduct discovery it is incumbent on Petitioner to (1) provide reasons for any requested discovery; (2) include copies of any proposed interrogatories and requests for admission; and (3) specify any requested documents. See Rule 6(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts.

At this early stage of this proceeding, Petitioner's motions for discovery are premature. Respondent has not yet filed a response to Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Doc. 1) and Petitioner has filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Petition ( Doc. 9) which is pending. It is, therefore, too early for the Court to ascertain all of the issues in this case and determine whether, and what, discovery should be allowed pursuant to Rule 6(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Consequently, the Court will deny Petitioner's motions without prejudice. Petitioner may renew his requests for discovery after his pending motion to file an amended petition is decided and Respondent answers his petition, or amended petition, as the case may be. Petitioner will be required to comply with the rules of procedure as outlined herein.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Conduct Limited Discovery ( Doc. 10) and his Request to Produce Documents and Tangible Things ( Doc. 11) are DENIED without prejudice as premature.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Thomas v. Janecka

United States District Court, D. New Mexico
May 15, 2009
No. CV 09-0174 RB/LAM (D.N.M. May. 15, 2009)
Case details for

Thomas v. Janecka

Case Details

Full title:JOHN PAUL THOMAS, Petitioner, v. JAMES JANECKA, WARDEN, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, D. New Mexico

Date published: May 15, 2009

Citations

No. CV 09-0174 RB/LAM (D.N.M. May. 15, 2009)