Opinion
NO. 5:12-CV-86 (CAR)
06-06-2012
DANIEL ERIC COBBLE, Petitioner, v. GREGORY MCLAUGHLIN, Warden, Respondent.
Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. §2254 Before the U.S. Magistrate Judge
ORDER
Respondent Warden Gregory McLaughlin has filed a motion to dismiss the above-captioned petition asserting that it is untimely under the one (1) year period of limitation set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and/or unexhausted. Doc. 9. Since Petitioner Daniel Eric Cobble is proceeding pro se, the Court deems it appropriate and necessary to advise him of his obligation to respond to said motion and of the consequences which he may suffer if he fails to file a proper response.
Petitioner is advised:
(1) that a motion to dismiss this petition has been filed herein by the Respondent;
(2) that he has the right to oppose the granting of that motion; and,
(3) that if he fails to oppose said motion, his petition may be DISMISSED.
The Petitioner is further advised that, under the procedures and policies of this court, motions to dismiss are normally decided on briefs. That is, the Court considers the pleadings and briefs filed by the parties in deciding whether dismissal is appropriate under the law. Failure of the Petitioner to respond, in writing, to the motion to dismiss may result in the granting of said motion, without a hearing or any further proceedings.
Accordingly, the Petitioner is ORDERED AND DIRECTED to file a response to the Respondent's motion to dismiss ON OR BEFORE JULY 2, 2012. Thereafter, the Court will consider the motion and any opposition to the same filed by the Petitioner. If no response is submitted by Petitioner, the Court will consider said motion to be uncontested.
______________
Charles H. Weigle
United States Magistrate Judge