Dawson v. Zuniga

Filing 20

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE Why Respondent Should Not Be Sanctioned for Failure to Respond to the Petition, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/10/16: Response Due Within 15 Days. (Hellings, J)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

LONNIE DAWSON,

5

Petitioner,

6

v.

7
8

R. ZUNIGA, Warden,
Respondent.

9

Case No. 1:15-cv-01217-LJO-SKO HC
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
RESPONDENT SHOULD NOT BE
SANCTIONED FOR FAILURE TO
RESPOND TO THE PETITION
(Doc. 18)
RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 15 DAYS

10
On January 7, 2016, the Court entered an order granting Respondent’s third motion for an

11
12

extension of time in which to respond to the petition for writ of habeas corpus in the above-

13

captioned case, which was filed on August 6, 2015. Doc. 18. Although the order required that

14

the response be filed on or before February 8, 2015, Respondent has neither filed his response nor

15

requested a fourth extension of time in which to do so.

16

The Court has discretion to impose any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or

17
within the inherent power of the Court, based on Respondent's failure to comply with the Court's
18
19

order. F.R.Civ.P. 11; Local Rule 110.
Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS that within 15 days from the date of this order,

20
21

Respondent shall file a written response to the Court, showing cause why sanctions should not be

22

imposed against him for failure to obey the Court's order of January 7, 2016. Filing of the answer

23

to the petition shall be considered an appropriate response.

24
25
IT IS SO ORDERED.
26
27

Dated:

February 10, 2016

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

28
1