Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fulton v. Neotti

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 7, 2010

MICHAEL D. FULTON
v.
GEORGE A. NEOTTI, WARDEN

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Present: The Honorable Jay C. Gandhi, United States Magistrate Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On May 18, 2010, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The Court issued an Order Requiring Expedited Response on May 26, 2010, due to the fact that "Petitioner will be eligible for release from prison on or about June 30, 2010." (See Court's May 26, 2010 Order Requiring Expedited Response at 1.) The Court ordered Respondent to file a Motion to Dismiss no later than "ten (10) days from the filing date of this Order." (Id. (bold in original).)

On June 7, 2010, Respondent filed an Application for Extension of Time to File Response to Petition for Habeas Corpus ("Application"). In the Application, Respondent sought a twenty-one day extension of time to file either a Motion to Dismiss or Return to the Petition. (See App. at 1.) The Court granted in part and denied in part Respondent's Application. (See Court's June 10, 2010 Order.) The Court denied Respondent's request for a twenty-one day extension, but granted Respondent an extension of ten days until June 17, 2010 in which to file a response to the Petition. (Id.) Specifically, the Court stated that "[n]o further extensions shall be entertained." (Id.) However, Respondent did not obey the Court's June 10, 2010 Order and filed his Motion to Dismiss on June 28, 2010, eleven days after the June 17, 2010 deadline and twenty one days after the original June 7, 2010 deadline.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT, on or before July 14, 2010, Respondent shall show cause, if there be any, why sanctions should not be imposed for Respondent's blatant failure to obey the orders of this Court. Respondent shall attempt to show such cause in writing by filing a declaration signed under penalty of perjury. In particular, Respondent's declaration must address why the Motion to Dismiss was filed on June 28, 2010, eleven days after the June 17, 2010 deadline. Respondent's declaration must also include separate declarations by both Deputy Attorney General Kim Aarons and Supervising Deputy Attorney General Jessica N. Blonien. If the Court determines that Respondent failed to provide a satisfactory response to the Order to Show Cause, the Court may order further proceedings, at any time, as appropriate.

20100707

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.