From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rich v. Campbell

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 18, 2007
No. CIV S-05-0892 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-05-0892 MCE GGH P.

December 18, 2007


ORDER


Petitioner, proceeding with appointed counsel, has filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On November 19, 2007, petitioner's counsel filed a motion for summary judgment, properly noticing a hearing on the dispositive motion before the undersigned for December 20, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. Respondent has failed to file any response to the motion and, in failing to file written opposition, has lost the privilege to speak in opposition to the motion at the hearing. See Local Rule 78-230(c). Nevertheless, respondent's counsel is directed to appear at the aforementioned hearing and to show cause for respondent's omission and why summary judgment should not be entered for petitioner based on the wholesale default.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rich v. Campbell

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 18, 2007
No. CIV S-05-0892 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2007)
Case details for

Rich v. Campbell

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH WAYNE RICH, Petitioner, v. ROSEANNE CAMPBELL, Warden, Respondent

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Dec 18, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-05-0892 MCE GGH P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2007)