(HC) Fair v. Atchley ( 2024 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSEPH D. FAIR, JR. No. 2:20-cv-01107-TLN-DB 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 MATTHEW ATCHLEY 15 Respondent. 16 17 This matter is before the Court on pro se Petitioner Joseph Fair, Jr.’s (“Petitioner”) Motion 18 for Relief from Judgment.1 (ECF No. 35.) Respondent Matthew Atchley (“Respondent”) did not 19 file an opposition. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s motion. 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 1 As discussed below, the Court construes Petitioner’s objections as a motion for relief from 28 judgment. 1 A detailed recitation of the factual and procedural history is not necessary for the 2 disposition of Petitioner’s motion. In short, Petitioner is a state prisoner challenging his criminal 3 convictions via a writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 15.) On July 14, 2023, the magistrate judge 4 made findings and recommended the Court deny Petitioner’s habeas petition for failing to meet 5 the standards set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) (“F&Rs”). (ECF No. 32.) The F&Rs were served 6 on Petitioner that same day via U.S. mail, and any objections thereto were due within thirty (30) 7 days. (Id.) Petitioner did not file any objections to the F&Rs within the applicable timeframe. 8 On September 5, 2023, the Court reviewed the F&Rs and found them to be supported by 9 the record and the magistrate judge’s analysis and adopted the F&Rs in full. (ECF No. 33.) The 10 Clerk of Court entered Judgment, closing the case, that same day. (ECF No. 34.) 11 On October 20, 2023, Petitioner filed objections to the F&Rs, principally contending the 12 trial court prejudicially erred during his underlying criminal trial and requesting the Court permit 13 him to file late objections to the F&Rs because he has good cause. (ECF No. 35.) Petitioner 14 maintains the prosecution of his habeas petition was contingent upon legal assistance provided by 15 the prison where he is housed, and the legal assistant working on his case was let go. (Id.) As a 16 result, Petitioner contends he was unable to timely file objections to the F&Rs. (Id.) 17 As discussed above, Petitioner’s objections to the F&Rs were due thirty (30) days after 18 service. Petitioner filed objections more than thirty days after service and after the clerk entered 19 Judgment in this case. Thus, Petitioner’s objections are untimely and improper. Nevertheless, 20 the Court construes Petitioner’s objections as a motion for relief from judgment. See Hebbe v. 21 Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (court must construe pro se plaintiff’s pleadings 22 liberally). 23 On motion and just terms, a district court may relieve a party from a final judgment for the 24 following reasons: 25 (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; 26 (2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, 27 could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial 28 under Rule 59(b); 1 2 (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), 3 misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; 4 (4) the judgment is void; 5 (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is 6 based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or 7 applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or 8 (6) any other reason that justifies relief. 9 | Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). 10 Petitioner does not argue any of the first five categories (nor does the Court find them 11 || applicable), leaving only the sixth, catchall category. While Petitioner may have good cause for 12 || submitting late objections, Petitioner has failed to demonstrate he is entitled to relief from 13 | Judgment. The Court has already reviewed the F&Rs and found them to be supported by the 14 || record and well-reasoned. (ECF No. 33.) Thus, permitting late objections to the F&Rs would be 15 | futile. 16 Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment. (ECF No. 17 || 35.) 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || Date: May 15, 2024 20 /) /) 21 “ ! fb 22 Troy L. Nuhlep ] 23 United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28