IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 3, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT,
MICHAEL R. EPPS, JR., MOVANT.
Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a motion for a writ of error under 28 U.S.C. § 1651. On November 19, 2010, respondent filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the movant waived his right to collaterally attack his sentence and the motion is barred by the terms of his plea agreement. Movant has not filed an opposition.
Movant is admonished that 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. 230(l). 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. 110. The court may dismiss this action with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to obey an order to refile 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 thirty 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 movant's motion be dismissed.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.