IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 4, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT,
WILLIAM LAWRENCE POTTER, MOVANT.
Movant, a federal prisoner proceeding with counsel, has filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On September 23, 2009, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. Movant has not filed an opposition or a statement of no opposition.
A responding party's failure "to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions." L. R. 78-230(m). Failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." L. R. 11-110. The court may recommend this action be dismissed with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if movant disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1252 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff's failure to comply with local rule regarding notice of change of address affirmed).
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, within 30 days of the date of this order, movant shall file either an opposition to the motion to dismiss or a statement of no opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.