-RAM Dock v. LeGrand et al, No. 3:2011cv00103 - Document 10 (D. Nev. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER DISMISSING CASE - The petition is DISMISSED with prejudice as untimely. FURTHER ORD P's # 7 Motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED. FURTHER ORD that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. FURTHER ORD Clerk of Court shall informally electronically serve a copy of this order -- along with a copy of the show cause order (# 5 ) and the petition (# 6 ), upon Rs by adding Nevada AG Catherine Cortez Masto as counsel for Rs and generating a notice of electronic filing to her office. ( E-service to AG performed 8/23/2011; ## 5 & 6 via NEF regeneration ) No response is required from Rs. Clerk shall enter final judgment accordingly, dismissing this action with prejudice Signed by Judge Howard D. McKibben on 8/22/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-RAM Dock v. LeGrand et al Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 7 8 9 TYRONE DOCK, 10 Petitioner, 3:11-cv-00103-HDM-RAM 11 vs. ORDER 12 13 ROBERT LEGRAND, et al. 14 Respondents. 15 16 Petitioner has not responded to the order (#5) directing that he show cause why the 17 petition should not be dismissed with prejudice as untimely. Petitioner has not done so or 18 otherwise responded. On the face of the record, the petition is time-barred. #5, at 2. The 19 order informed petitioner that the entire petition would be dismissed with prejudice without 20 further advance notice if he did not timely respond and, further, that counsel would not be 21 appointed prior to a pro se response to the show cause order. #5, at 3 & 4. 22 23 24 25 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that the petition shall be DISMISSED with prejudice as untimely. IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that petitioner’s motion (#7) for appointment of counsel is DENIED. 26 IT FURTHER IS ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 27 IT FURTHER IS ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 28 Cases, that the Clerk of Court shall informally electronically serve a copy of this order -- along Dockets.Justia.com 1 with a copy of the show cause order (#5) and the petition (#6) -- in a manner consistent with 2 the Clerk’s current practice, upon respondents by adding Nevada Attorney General Catherine 3 Cortez Masto as counsel for respondents and generating a notice of electronic filing to her 4 office. No response is required from respondents. 5 The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment accordingly against petitioner and in favor 6 of respondents, dismissing this action with prejudice. 7 DATED: August 22, 2011. 8 9 10 _________________________________ HOWARD D. MCKIBBEN United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2-
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
