Maestas v. State of California et al

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 2/21/2017 ORDERING, within 21 days, petitioner shall file either an opposition to the motion to dismiss or a statement of no opposition.(Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

LENNY ROSS MAESTAS,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:16-cv-2421-MCE-EFB P

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a county inmate without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28

18

U.S.C. § 2254. On January 17, 2017, respondent filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that

19

there is no longer a case or controversy to support jurisdiction. Petitioner has not filed an

20

opposition or a statement of no opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss.

21

A responding party’s failure “to file written opposition or to file a statement of no

22

opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may

23

result in the imposition of sanctions.” L. R. 230(l). Failure to comply with any order or with the

24

Local Rules “may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or

25

Rule or within the inherent power of the Court.” L. R. 110. The court may dismiss this action

26

with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See

27

Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in

28

dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended
1

1

complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439,

2

1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule

3

regarding notice of change of address affirmed).

4

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, within 21 days of the date of this order,

5

petitioner shall file either an opposition to the motion to dismiss or a statement of no opposition.

6

Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed

7

without prejudice.

8

Dated: February 21, 2017.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2