From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Briggs v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-1756 AC (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-1756 AC

01-04-2013

ROBIN C. BRIGGS, Petitioner, v. GARY SWARTHOUT, Respondent.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

On August 2, 2012, the court ordered petitioner within 30 days to file an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis, or to pay the appropriate filing fee. See Doc. No. 4. To date, petitioner has not filed his affidavit, paid the fee, or otherwise responded to the court's August 2, 2012 order.

On September 25, 2012, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. Petitioner has not filed an opposition or otherwise responded to the motion. Local Rule 230(1) provides in part: "Failure of the responding party to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion . . . ."

Local Rule 110 further provides that failure of a party to comply with the court's rules or with any order of the court "may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court."

The court will accordingly direct petitioner, within 30 days, to comply with the court's August 2, 2012 order directing petitioner to file an affidavit in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis, or to pay the filing fee of $5.00. Petitioner's failure to comply with the court's August 2, 2012 order within 30 days may result in a recommendation that this petition be dismissed without prejudice.

The court will also direct petitioner within 30 days to respond to the motion to dismiss, by filing either an opposition to the motion or a statement that petitioner has no objection. Petitioner's failure to respond to the motion to dismiss may be deemed a waiver of any opposition, and may result in a recommendation that the petition be dismissed for the reasons cited in the motion.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk shall serve petitioner with a copy of the motion to dismiss, filed September 25, 2012 (Doc. No. 8);

2. Petitioner shall, within 30 days, comply with the court's August 2, 2012 order directing petitioner to file an affidavit in support of his application to proceed in forma pauperis, or to pay the filing fee of $5.00;

3. Petitioner shall, within 30 days, respond to the motion to dismiss, by filing either an opposition to the motion or a statement that petitioner has no objection; and

4. Failure of petitioner to comply with the provisions of this order may result in a recommendation that this petition be dismissed.

______________________

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Briggs v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 4, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-1756 AC (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)
Case details for

Briggs v. Swarthout

Case Details

Full title:ROBIN C. BRIGGS, Petitioner, v. GARY SWARTHOUT, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 4, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-1756 AC (E.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2013)