(HC) Slaven v. Covello

District Court, E.D. California·Decided July 1, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-00606·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10

11 LEONARD A. SLAVEN, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00606-AWI-JLT (HC) ) 12 Petitioner, ) ORDER CONSTRUING OBJECTIONS IN PART ) AS MOTION TO AMEND TO NAME PROPER 13 v. ) RESPONDENT ) ) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND AND CALIFORNIA, 15 Respondent. ) DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CHANGE ) NAME OF RESPONDENT 16 )

17 In the findings and recommendation, the Court noted that the Petitioner failed to name the 18 proper respondent. (Doc. 7 at 2.) In his objections to the findings and recommendation, Petitioner 19 states that he mistakenly named the wrong respondent and names C. Pfeiffer, who is the Warden at 20 Kern Valley State Prison. (Doc. 8 at 1.) The Court will construe this as a motion to amend to name the 21 proper respondent and grant the motion. Because it appears Warden C. Pfeiffer is a proper party (Rule 22 2(a) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases; Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 23 1996); Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994)), the Clerk of Court is 24 DIRECTED to change the name of the Respondent to C. Pfeiffer, Warden. 25

27 Dated: July 1, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 28 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(HC) Slaven v. Covello, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

(HC) Slaven v. Covello ((HC) Slaven v. Covello) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jerry F. Stanley v. California Supreme Court
21 F.3d 359 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez
81 F.3d 891 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)