(HC) Williams v. Pallares ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TANISHIA SAVANNAH WILLIAMS, No. 2:20-cv-01519-TLN-JDP 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 MICHAEL PALLARES, 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner, proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant 18 to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On May 24, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 21 were served on Petitioner and which contained notice to Petitioner that any objections to the 22 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 40.) Petitioner 23 has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.1 (ECF No. 47.) 24 1 In her objections, Petitioner appears to argue that should the Court find that she has not 25 established good cause to stay her petition, Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), she should be afforded additional time to obtain assistance from counsel — which she claims her family 26 recently retained — and to file new objections. (ECF No. 47.) Petitioner has had more than three 27 months to file objections to the May 24, 2022 findings and recommendations. And despite her representation that she has retained counsel, no attorney has appeared in this action on her behalf. 28 Accordingly, there is no basis for granting Petitioner additional time to seek legal assistance and 1 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this 2 | Court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the 3 | Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper 4 | analysis. 5 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 6 1. Petitioner’s Motion for an Extension of Time to File Objections (ECF No. 46) is 7 | GRANTED, and her Objections filed September 7, 2022 CECF No. 47) are deemed timely; 8 2. The Findings and Recommendations filed May 24, 2022 (ECF No. 40) are ADOPTED 9 | in full; and 10 3. Petitioner’s Motion to Reopen the Case (ECF No. 38) and Motion for Court Order 11 | (ECF No. 39) are DENIED. 12 | DATED: September 21, 2022 { /) 13 “ Lu Troy L. Nuhlep ] 15 United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 | file new objections.