(HC) Kirk v. Felker, et al, No. 2:2007cv02521 - Document 56 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 6/29/10 ADOPTING 49 Findings and Recommendations in full. Resp's 12 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Kirk v. Felker, et al Doc. 56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JOHN MICHAEL KIRK, 11 Petitioner, 12 13 No. CIV S-07-2521 GEB GGH P vs. TOM FELKER, et al., 14 Respondents. 15 ORDER / 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ 17 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States 18 Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 19 On May 13, 2010, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 20 which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to 21 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Respondent was 22 granted an extension of time to file objections. Respondent has filed a “Request for 23 Reconsideration by the District Court of Magistrate Judge’s Ruling Regarding Equitable 24 Tolling,” which the court construes as objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 Petitioner has filed a reply. 26 \\\\\ 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 2 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire 3 file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 4 proper analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. The findings and recommendations filed May 13, 2010, are adopted in full; and 7 2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition as untimely, filed on April 25, 8 2008 (docket # 12), is denied. 9 Dated: June 29, 2010 10 11 12 GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
