Fisher

(HC) Bisel v. Fisher

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 7, 20231:17-cv-00013California1,486 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 GREGORY EUGENE BISEL, No. 1:17-cv-00013-ADA-SKO (HC) Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING APPELLANT’S

MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

v. TO FILE A NOTICE OF APPEAL, AS

PERMITTED BY FEDERAL RULE OF

RAY FISHER, JR., et al., APPELLATE PROCEDURE 4(a)(5)(C), AND

DENYING APPELLANT’S NOTICE OF

Defendants. APPEAL AS UNTIMELY (ECF Nos. 97, 106) 17 18 I.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

20 Petitioner and Appellant Gregory Eugene Bisel (“Appellant”) is a state parolee proceeding 21 pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 26, 2023, 22 this Court adopted the U.S. Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations, denying Appellant’s 23 petition for writ of habeas corpus and declining to issue a certificate of appealability. (ECF No. 24 95.) Judgment was entered that same day. (ECF No. 96.) 25 On March 3, 2023, Appellant filed a motion for a sixty-day extension of time to file an 26…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.