IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 13, 2011
CHRISTOPHER REED, PETITIONER,
MICHAEL MARTEL, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
By order dated April 11, 2011, petitioner was ordered to show cause, within twenty-eight days, why his action should not be dismissed for failure to oppose respondent's motion to dismiss. In essence, petitioner was given an opportunity to rectify his non-opposition. The twenty-eight day period has now expired, and petitioner has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court's order. Petitioner has failed to oppose the motion to dismiss filed by respondent.
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
If petitioner files objections, he shall also address if a certificate of appealability should issue and, if so, as to which issues. A certificate of appealability may issue under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). The certificate of appealability must "indicate which specific issue or issues satisfy" the requirement. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(3).
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any reply to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.