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.

Stephen A. Porter v. Richard Ives

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


February 7, 2012

STEPHEN A. PORTER, PETITIONER,
v.
RICHARD IVES, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

ORDER

Movant is a former federal prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. This action is proceeding before a United States Magistrate Judge with the consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). See Consent filed June 3, 2010 (Doc. No. 6); Consent filed June 7, 2010 (Doc. No. 9).

On July 15, 2010, respondents filed a motion to dismiss. Petitioner failed to timely file an opposition to the motion, and on September 7, 2010, the court ordered petitioner to file within twenty-one days either an opposition to the motion or a statement of non-opposition. On December 7, 2010, this action was dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) due to petitioner's failure to comply with the September 7, 2010 order. Judgment was entered on the same day.

On April 11, 2011, petitioner filed a request to reopen this action. Therein, petitioner represents that he did not receive the court's order denying his motion for appointment of counsel, but he makes no reference at all to respondents' motion to dismiss or the court's September 7, 2010 order directing him to file either an opposition to the motion dismiss or a statement of non-opposition. Good cause appearing, petitioner will be granted twenty-one days from the date of this order in which to supplement his request to reopen the action with a proposed opposition to respondents' motion to dismiss. Failure to comply with this order will result in the denial of petitioner's request to reopen the action.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner is granted twenty-one days from the date of this order in which to supplement his request to reopen the action with a proposed opposition to respondents' motion to dismiss. Failure to comply with this order will result in the denial of petitioner's request to reopen the action.

20120207

© 1992-2012 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.