Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02282/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02282-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
California Department of Correction and Rehabilitation
Respondent
Toriano Germaine Smith
Petitioner

Document Text:

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 

27 

28 

1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TORIANO GERMAINE SMITH, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTION AND 

REHABILITATION, 

Respondent. 

No. 2:19-cv-2282-KJM-EFB P 

ORDER 

Petitioner proceeds without counsel and seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 2254. On January 31 2020, respondent filed a motion to dismiss. ECF No. 10. 

Petitioner has not filed an opposition or a statement of no opposition to respondents’ motion to 

dismiss and the time for doing so has expired. 

 A responding party’s failure “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 and may 

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

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

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

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

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

Case 2:19-cv-02282-KJM-EFB Document 13 Filed 02/26/20 Page 1 of 2
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 

27 

28 

2 

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

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

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

regarding notice of change of address affirmed). 

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

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

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

without prejudice. 

Dated: February 25, 2020. 

Case 2:19-cv-02282-KJM-EFB Document 13 Filed 02/26/20 Page 2 of 2