(HC)Singh

1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 RAGHVENDRA SINGH, Case No. 2:21-cv-01731-TLN-JDP (HC) 9 Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION

TO APPOINT COUNSEL

10 v. ECF No. 31 11 CHRISTIAN PFEIFFER,

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

12 Respondent. THAT RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO

DISMISS BE GRANTED

13

OBJECTIONS DUE IN FOURTEEN DAYS

14 ECF No. 28 15 16 Petitioner Raghvendra Singh filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 17 § 2254. Respondent moves to dismiss the petition, ECF No. 28, and argues that the petition must 18 be dismissed because state court proceedings are ongoing. Petitioner has opposed the motion and 19 moved to appoint counsel. ECF No. 31. The motion to dismiss should be granted. 20 No habeas rule specifically applies to motions to dismiss. See Hillery v. Pulley, 533 F. 21 Supp. 1189, 1194 (E.D. Cal. 1982) (“Motion practice in habeas corpus is not specifically 22 provided for in the rules but must be inferred from their structure and the Advisory Committee 23 Notes.”). The…