From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Larshin v. Pickett

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0122 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-cv-0122 JAM KJN P

07-29-2021

ANDREY LARSHIN, Petitioner, v. J. PICKETT, Respondent.


ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On June 16, 2021, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. Petitioner has not filed an 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 . . . .” Id.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner show cause, within thirty days, why his failure to oppose respondent's June 16, 2021 motion to dismiss should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion, and he shall file an opposition. Petitioner is cautioned that failure to respond to the instant order, or to file an opposition to the pending motion to dismiss, will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.


Summaries of

Larshin v. Pickett

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jul 29, 2021
2:21-cv-0122 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)
Case details for

Larshin v. Pickett

Case Details

Full title:ANDREY LARSHIN, Petitioner, v. J. PICKETT, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jul 29, 2021

Citations

2:21-cv-0122 JAM KJN P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 29, 2021)