Kenneth Wilson v. Gigi Matteson

C.D. California

Kenneth Wilson v. Gigi Matteson

District Court, C.D. California·Decided February 1, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-07412·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 20-7412 DOC (MRW) Date February 1, 2021 Title Wilson v. Matteson

Present: Hon. Michael R. Wilner, U.S. Magistrate Judge Veronica Piper n/a Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys for Petitioner: Attorneys for Respondent: n/a n/a Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 1. The Attorney General moved to dismiss Petitioner’s habeas action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Docket # 10.) The court ordered Petitioner to respond to the motion by January 6, 2021. (Docket # 12.) Petitioner failed to file any response. 2. Petitioner is ordered to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to oppose the motion (Local Rule 7-12) and for failing to comply with a court order. Petitioner’s response to the OSC and the substantive opposition to the motion are due by or before February 26. Failure to comply with this order will result in a reeommendation that the action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Local Rule 7-12. Applied Underwriters. Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2019).

CV-90 (10/08) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 20-7412 DOC (MRW) Date February 1, 2021 Title Wilson v. Matteson

Present: Hon. Michael R. Wilner, U.S. Magistrate Judge Veronica Piper n/a Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys for Petitioner: Attorneys for Respondent: n/a n/a Proceedings: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 1. The Attorney General moved to dismiss Petitioner’s habeas action for failure to state a cognizable claim for relief. (Docket # 10.) The court ordered Petitioner to respond to the motion by January 6, 2021. (Docket # 12.) Petitioner failed to file any response. 2. Petitioner is ordered to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to oppose the motion (Local Rule 7-12) and for failing to comply with a court order. Petitioner’s response to the OSC and the substantive opposition to the motion are due by or before February 26. Failure to comply with this order will result in a reeommendation that the action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Local Rule 7-12. Applied Underwriters. Inc. v. Lichtenegger, 913 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2019).

CV-90 (10/08) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1

Kenneth Wilson v. Gigi Matteson, (C.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

Kenneth Wilson v. Gigi Matteson (Kenneth Wilson v. Gigi Matteson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related