IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 4, 2010
TIMOTHY JOE OSBORNE, PETITIONER,
MATTHEW CATE, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 2, 2010, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. Petitioner has not filed an opposition to the motion and the time for doing so has expired. Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: "Failure of the responding party 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...."
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner shall show cause in writing, within twenty-one days, why his failure to oppose respondent's July 2, 2010 motion to dismiss should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion, and shall file such opposition. Failure to respond to this order, or to file an opposition to the pending motion to dismiss, will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.