Tucker v. Warden

Filing 36

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 7/29/2019 ORDERING Warden Gastelo is substituted as Respondent and ORDERING Petitioner to show cause, within 30 days, why his failure to oppose 32 Motion to Dismiss should not be deemed a waiver of opposition to the granting of the motion, and he shall file an opposition. (Henshaw, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GREGORY ALLEN TUCKER,

12

No. 2:18-cv-0035 TLN KJN P

Petitioner,

13

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

JOSE GASTELO,1

14
15

Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se, with an application for writ of habeas

18

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On May 3, 2019, respondent filed a motion to dismiss

19

petitioner’s amended petition. On June 5, 2019, petitioner was granted an extension of time, up

20

to and including July 15, 2019, in which to file an opposition, and was cautioned that failure to

21

file a timely opposition may result in the dismissal of this action. (ECF No. 34.) That deadline

22

has now passed, and petitioner has not filed an opposition to the motion.
Local Rule 230(l) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file written

23
24

opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to

25

the granting of the motion . . . .” Id.

26

////

27

1

28

Petitioner was transferred to California Men’s Colony, where the current warden is Jose
Gastelo. Accordingly, Warden Gastelo is substituted as respondent in this matter. Fed. R. Civ. P.
25(d); see Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379 (9th Cir. 1992).
1

1

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Warden Gastelo is substituted as respondent; and

3

2. Petitioner shall show cause, within thirty days, why his failure to oppose respondent’s

4

motion to dismiss should not be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion,

5

and he shall file an opposition. Petitioner is cautioned that failure to respond to the instant order,

6

or to file an opposition to the pending motion to dismiss, will result in a recommendation that this

7

action be dismissed.

8

Dated: July 29, 2019

9
10
11

/tuck0035.46h

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