Butte v. Allison
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/15/2011 ORDERING that within 20 days, Ptnr shall file an opposition to Resp's 20 motion to dismiss and shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for the failure to file a timely opposition. (Zignago, K.)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
RAYMOND HAROLD BUTTE,
11
Petitioner,
12
13
No. CIV S-11-0510 GEB DAD P
vs.
K. ALLISON, Warden,
14
Respondent.
15
ORDER
/
16
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas
17
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 9, 2011, respondent filed a motion to dismiss.
18
Petitioner has not filed an opposition to the motion. Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part:
19
“Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition
20
may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .”
21
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within twenty days of the
22
date of this order, petitioner shall file and serve an opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss
23
and shall show cause in writing why sanctions should not be imposed for the failure to file a
24
timely opposition. In the alternative, if petitioner no longer wishes to proceed with this matter,
25
/////
26
/////
1
1
he may file a request to dismiss this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the
2
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
3
DATED: June 15, 2011.
4
5
6
DAD:4
butte510.osc
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
