United States District Court, C.D. California
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHARLES F. EICK, Magistrate Judge.
This Report and Recommendation is submitted to the Honorable George H. Wu, United States District Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636 and General Order 05-07 of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
Petitioner filed a "Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody" on January 29, 2014. Respondent filed an Answer on April 25, 2014. Petitioner failed to file a Reply to the Answer within the allotted time.
On May 20, 2014, the Magistrate Judge ordered that Petitioner file a Reply to the Answer within twenty (20) days of May 20, 2014. The Magistrate Judge cautioned Petitioner that failure to do so "may result in the denial and dismissal of the Petition." Nevertheless, Petitioner again failed to file a Reply to the Answer within the allotted time.
The Petition should be denied and dismissed without prejudice. Petitioner has failed to file a timely Reply, despite a court order that he do so. The Court has inherent power to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases by dismissing actions for failure to prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962). The Court has considered the factors recited in Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-62 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 915 (1992), and has concluded that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate. In particular, any less drastic alternative would not be effective under the circumstances of this case.
For all of the foregoing reasons, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Court issue an Order: (1) accepting and adopting this Report and Recommendation; and (2) directing that Judgment be entered ...