Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Flores v. Borders, 1:18-cv-00690-DAD-JDP. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20181015799 Visitors: 12
Filed: Oct. 12, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 12, 2018
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS ECF No. 10 JEREMY D. PETERSON , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner Jose Raul Flores is proceeding without counsel on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2254. ECF No. 1. Respondent has moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it was filed beyond the one-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. 2244(d). ECF No. 10. Petitioner has not filed a response to respondent's motion to dismiss. The court will require petition
More

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS ECF No. 10

Petitioner Jose Raul Flores is proceeding without counsel on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF No. 1. Respondent has moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it was filed beyond the one-year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). ECF No. 10. Petitioner has not filed a response to respondent's motion to dismiss.

The court will require petitioner to file a response.

Accordingly,

1. Petitioner must file a response to respondent's motion to dismiss this case (ECF No. 11) within 21 days of the service of this order. Under Local Rule 230(l), failure of the responding party to file a response may result in sanctions. 2. Respondent may file a reply in support of their request within 7 days of the service of petitioner's response.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer