Trate
(HC) Hill v. Trate
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 THOMAS AUSTIN HILL, Case No.: 1:22-cv-01433-KJM-CDB 12 Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE IN WRITING
WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE
13 v. DISMISSED FOR PETITIONER’S FAILURE
TO FILE AN OPPOSITION OR STATEMENT
14 B. M. TRATE, OF NON-OPPOSITION TO RESPONDENT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS
15 Respondent. 14-DAY DEADLINE 16 Clerk of the Court to Update Petitioner’s 17 Address and Effect Service
18 19 Petitioner Thomas Austin Hill is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this habeas 20 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 21 Background 22 On September 12, 2024, Respondent B. M. Trate filed a motion to dismiss Petitioner’s 23 complaint. (Doc. 22). Although Petitioner did not timely respond to the motion, on September 24 23, 2024, the Clerk of the Court docketed on Petitioner’s behalf a notice of change of address, 25 signed and dated by Petitioner on September 17, 2024, in which Petitioner attested that he had left 26 …