Opinion
No. 2:11-cv-2213 JFM (HC)
02-02-2012
LUIS PACHECO, Petitioner, v. KATHLEEN ALLISON, Respondent.
ORDER
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On November 17, 2011, respondent filed a motion to dismiss and set the matter for hearing on February 9, 2012 before the undersigned. No opposition to the motion to dismiss has been filed.
Local Rule 230(c) provides that opposition to the granting of a motion must be filed fourteen days preceding the noticed hearing date. The Rule further provides that "[n]o party will be entitled to be heard in opposition to a motion at oral arguments if written opposition to the motion has not been timely filed by that party." In addition, Local Rule 230(i) provides that failure to appear may be deemed withdrawal of opposition to the motion or may result in sanctions. Finally, Local Rule 110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court."
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The hearing date of February 9, 2012 is vacated. The matter is re-set for hearing on March 1, 2012 at 11:00 a.m. in courtroom #26 before the undersigned.
2. Petitioner shall file opposition, if any, to the motion to dismiss, no later than February 10, 2012. Respondent's reply shall be due seven days thereafter. Petitioner's failure to file an opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE