(HC) Schweizer v. Suzanne M. Peery, No. 2:2020cv00517 - Document 21 (E.D. Cal. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis M. Cota on 07/21/2021 GRANTING 20 Motion for Extension of Time. Petitioner may file Objections to the Findings and Recommendations within 60 days of the date of this order. (Rodriguez, E)

Download PDF
(HC) Schweizer v. Suzanne M. Peery Doc. 21 Case 2:20-cv-00517-JAM-DMC Document 21 Filed 07/21/21 Page 1 of 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TYLER CHRISTOPHER SCHWEIZER, 12 Petitioner, ORDER 13 14 No. 2:20-CV-0517-JAM-DMC-P v. SUZANNE M. PEERY, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas 18 corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Before the Court is Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time to 19 object to the Court’s findings and recommendations issued on June 29, 2021. ECF Nos. 19, 20. The 20 Court recommended that Petitioner’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus be denied. ECF No. 19 at 21 11. The parties had fourteen days to object to the findings and recommendations. Id. 22 Petitioner contends that he did not receive a copy of the findings and 23 recommendations until July 7, 2021, that he is a layman needing additional time to research, and 24 that he has limited access to a prison law library. ECF No. 20 at 1. He moves for an extension of 25 sixty days. Id. For good cause shown, the Court will grant the requested extension. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-00517-JAM-DMC Document 21 Filed 07/21/21 Page 2 of 2 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 2 1. Petitioner’s motion for an extension of time (ECF No. 20) is GRANTED. 3 2. Petitioner may file objections to the Court’s findings and recommendations 4 within sixty (60) days of the date of this order. 5 6 7 Dated: July 21, 2021 ____________________________________ DENNIS M. COTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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.