Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Roberson-Anderson v. Clark, 2:19-cv-2399 WBS AC P. (2020)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20200310a33 Visitors: 6
Filed: Mar. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 2020
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. ECF Nos. 1, 2. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On January 30, 2020, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action and an amended motion to dismiss. ECF Nos. 10, 11. Petitioner has not filed a response to the am
More

ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ECF Nos. 1, 2. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On January 30, 2020, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this action and an amended motion to dismiss. ECF Nos. 10, 11. Petitioner has not filed a response to the amended motion to dismiss.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty days of the date of this order, petitioner shall file and serve a response to the amended motion to dismiss. Failure to comply with this order in a timely manner may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

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