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.

Paul Banchich v. Raul Lopez

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


March 8, 2013

PAUL BANCHICH, PETITIONER,
v.
RAUL LOPEZ, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel. On November 13, 2012, petitioner filed a motion styled, "Motion for Summary Judgment (Respondent Failed to File Timely Response/Failure to Prosecute." (Dkt. No. 48.) Petitioner alleges respondent again filed a late response to a court order. Petitioner argues that the order dated October 19, 2012, directed respondent to file a response by October 26, 2012, and that respondent did not file the response until October 30, 2012. The court construes this motion as a request to disregard respondent's reply.

However, although the undersigned signed the order at issue on October 19, 2012, the order was not docketed or served until October 23, 2012. (Dkt. No. 46.) Thus, respondent's reply was not due until October 30, 2012, and respondent timely filed the reply on October 30, 2012. (Dkt. No. 47.) Thus, petitioner's motion is not well-taken, and is denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner's November 13, 2012 motion (dkt. no. 48) is denied.

20130308

© 1992-2013 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.