From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weller v. Haynes

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 11, 2023
3:20-cv-05861-RAJ-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 11, 2023)

Opinion

3:20-cv-05861-RAJ-TLF 3:20-cv-5862-RAJ-TLF

01-11-2023

JEFFREY WELLER, Petitioner, v. RONALD HAYNES, Respondent. SANDRA WELLER, Petitioner, v. DEBORAH WOFFORD, Respondent.


ORDER WITHDRAWING AND STRIKING DKT. 34, ORDER FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING, AND ORDER ON MOTION TO STRIKE

Theresa L. Fricke United States Magistrate Judge

These are federal habeas actions filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Weller v. Haynes, No. 20-5681-RAJ-TLF (“Jeffrey Weller Matter”), Dkt. 3; Weller v. Wofford, No. 20-5862-RAJ-TLF (“Sandra Weller Matter”), Dkt. 3.

Before the court is a motion to strike the respondent's objections, filed by each petitioner. Dkt. 36. Petitioners ask the Court to strike Dkt. 35, filed by Ronald Haynes and Deborah Wofford, the respondents.

Under Rule 10 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Federal Habeas Corpus Cases in the United States District Courts, the United States Magistrate Judge may conduct proceedings except for an order under rule 4, disposing of the petition. When this Court issued a proposed report and recommendation, it was not an order under Rule 4 that would dispose of the petition. The Court was attempting to give the parties an opportunity to provide feedback on a draft of a report and recommendation. This was not intended to be the final report and recommendation, but it is understandable that the respondents believed it appropriate to preserve the record by filing objections.

To remove this understandable confusion, the Court hereby withdraws and strikes Dkt. 34. The Court also grants the petitioners' motion to strike Dkt. 35 - without prejudice to respondents' right to re-raise their objections upon the issuance of a final report and recommendation - because when the Court withdraws and strikes Dkt. 34, it renders the respondents' objections moot. Therefore, the Court ORDERS as follows:

(a) The Clerk of the Court is directed to schedule oral argument on this matter and each party will be allocated 20 minutes.

(b) In preparation for oral argument, each party will be permitted to file a supplemental brief on or before January 20, 2023, limited to not more than 25-pages, addressing the impact of Shinn v. Ramirez, 142 S.Ct. 1718 (2022) on this matter.


Summaries of

Weller v. Haynes

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Jan 11, 2023
3:20-cv-05861-RAJ-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 11, 2023)
Case details for

Weller v. Haynes

Case Details

Full title:JEFFREY WELLER, Petitioner, v. RONALD HAYNES, Respondent. SANDRA WELLER…

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Jan 11, 2023

Citations

3:20-cv-05861-RAJ-TLF (W.D. Wash. Jan. 11, 2023)