Sherman
(HC) Banks v. Sherman
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LARRY BANKS, Case No. 1:20-cv-01225-DAD-EPG-HC
Petitioner, ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S
MOTION FOR DEFAULT
v. (ECF No. 18) STU SHERMAN, Respondent.
16 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On November 10, 2020, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition. (ECF No. 11). On January 8, 2021, the Court received the instant motion for default, in which Petitioner argues that Respondent did not comply with this Court’s order because Respondent filed a motion to dismiss instead of an answer addressing the merits of Petitioner’s claims. (ECF No. 18). In the September 10, 2020 order to respond, the Court ordered in pertinent part:
1. Within SIXTY (60) days of the date of service of this order, Respondent SHALL FILE a RESPONSE to the Petition. See Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Cluchette v. Rushen, 770 F.2d 1469, 1473-74 (9th Cir. 1985) (court has 26 …