UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 30, 2010
CURTIS A. GIBBS, PETITIONER,
J. E. THOMAS, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
ORDER CONSTRUING PETITIONER'S OBJECTION TO BE A PARTIAL OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS
(DOCS. 51, 49)
Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in a habeas corpus action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all further proceedings in the case, including the entry of final judgment, by manifesting their consent in writings signed by the parties or their representatives and filed by Petitioner on November 7, 2007, and on behalf of Respondent on June 9, 2010. Pending before the Court is Petitioner's motion for an extension of thirty (30) days (Doc. 51), filed on September 27, 2010, within which to respond to Respondent's motion to dismiss, which was filed on September 8, 2010.*fn1
Because Petitioner states that he has not received any motion to dismiss, good cause has been shown for the granting of a thirty-day extension of time for Petitioner to file an opposition to the motion to dismiss.*fn2
Accordingly, Petitioner's request for an extension of time is granted, and Petitioner may file his opposition to the motion to dismiss no later than thirty (30) days after the date of service of this order.
Further, to the extent that Petitioner's request includes an objection (Doc. 51, 4-6), Petitioner's objection is CONSTRUED as partial opposition to the motion to dismiss. Therefore, pursuant to Local Rule 230(l), Respondent may reply to the opposition, including Petitioner's objection, when Petitioner's opposition to the motion to dismiss is filed.*fn3
IT IS SO ORDERED.