Mendoza v. Cate

Filing 15

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/13/2010 ORDERING ptnr to show cause, in writing, why respondent's 11/3/10 motion to dismiss should not be granted. (Yin, K)

(HC) Mendoza v. Cate

Doc. 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. MATTHEW CATE, Respondent. / Petitioner, currently a federal prisoner, is proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner challenges a judgement of conviction entered against him in 2004 in the San Joaquin County Superior Court. On November 3, 2010, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition as untimely under the applicable oneyear statute of limitations. Petitioner has not filed an opposition to the motion. Local Rule 230(l) 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 . . . ." Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner show cause in writing, within twenty-one days, why respondent's November 3, 2010 motion to dismiss should ///// 1
Dockets.Justia.com

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ARQUIMEDES MENDOZA, Petitioner, No. CIV S-09-1710 MCE DAD P

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

not be granted. Petitioner's failure to respond to this order will result in the imposition of sanctions, including the possible dismissal of this habeas action. DATED: December 13, 2010.

DAD:4 mend1710.osc

2