(HC)Ram
(HC)Ram v. Warden
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10 SANTOSH RAM, Case No. 1:21-cv-01520-JLT-EPG-HC
11 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO
FILE RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S
12 v. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
13 WARDEN, 14 Respondent.
15 16 Petitioner Santosh Ram is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of 17 habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, which challenges a prison disciplinary proceeding 18 for assault on due process grounds, including sufficiency of the evidence. 19 The undersigned previously denied Petitioner’s motion to compel discovery and for a 20 deposition. (ECF No. 21.) Petitioner subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration with respect 21 to his request for the CCTV footage of the incident, specifically alleging that the DHO’s 22 description of the video “was inaccurate and false” because “[t]he video did not show any 23 strike”1 and that he never made the statements relied upon by the DHO in finding that Petitioner 24 committed the acts as charged. (ECF No. 22 at 2, 3.)2 Respondent did not…