Love v. Knipp

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/14/15 ORDERING that Petitioner is granted 30 days from the date of this order to file his opposition to respondents motion to dismiss. Failure to file an opposition to respondents motion to dismiss within 30 days will result in the courts August 25, 2015 findings and recommendations being submitted to the district court judge assigned to this case for decision. (Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DANTE L. LOVE,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-2817 JAM CKD P

v.

ORDER

WILLIAM KNIPP,

15

Respondent.

16
On September 8, 2015, petitioner filed a document the court construes as a request for an

17
18

extension of time to file an opposition to respondent’s pending motion to dismiss.1 Good cause

19

appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Petitioner is granted 30 days from the date of this order to file his opposition to

20
21

respondent’s motion to dismiss.

22

/////

23

/////

24

/////

25
1

26
27
28

In the motion, petitioner attempts to justify his delay in filing his opposition to respondent’s
motion to dismiss on the fact that he has appealed this court’s denial of his request for the
appointment of counsel to the Ninth Circuit. However, that is not a legitimate justification as the
court’s denial of petitioner’s request for the appointment of counsel is not appealable. See 28
U.S.C. § 1292.

1

2. Failure to file an opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss within 30 days will

2

result in the court’s August 25, 2015 findings and recommendations being submitted to the

3

district court judge assigned to this case for decision.

4

Dated: September 14, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9
10

1
love2817.111(2)

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2