From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sandoval v. Knipp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 31, 2013
No. 2: 12-cv-2489 WBS JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2: 12-cv-2489 WBS JFM (HC)

01-31-2013

HERMAN GARCIA SANDOVAL, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, Respondent.


ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 17, 2012, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. To date, petitioner has not filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss nor a statement of non-opposition 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 . . . ."

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner show cause, within twenty-one (21) days of the date of this order, why respondent's December 17, 2012 motion to dismiss should not be granted. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.

____________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Sandoval v. Knipp

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 31, 2013
No. 2: 12-cv-2489 WBS JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2013)
Case details for

Sandoval v. Knipp

Case Details

Full title:HERMAN GARCIA SANDOVAL, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM KNIPP, Respondent.

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

Date published: Jan 31, 2013

Citations

No. 2: 12-cv-2489 WBS JFM (HC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2013)