Ornoski
(HC) (DP) Espinoza v. Ornoski
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTONIO ESPINOZA, No. 2:94-cv-1665 KJM DB Petitioner, v. ORDER WARDEN, San Quentin State Prison, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding through counsel with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Two motions are pending. First, petitioner moves for an extension of time to file the joint statement ordered on January 24. Petitioner explains that his counsel is waiting for evidence from petitioner’s co-defendant’s case in order to best assess the status of the present case. Respondent does not oppose the extension of time. Petitioner demonstrates good cause for additional time. The second motion is petitioner’s request to file a motion under seal. The subject motion involves petitioner’s confidential medical records. Therefore, this court finds sealing appropriate. See James v. Servicesource, Inc., No. CIV.A. 3:07CV317, 2007 WL 4190794, at *4 (E.D. Va. Nov. 21, 2007)…