Brewer

(HC) Fiorito v. Brewer

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 23, 20242:23-cv-00206California1,784 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MICHAEL FIORITO, No. 2:23-cv-0206 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER BREWER, Respondent. 16 Petitioner is proceeding pro se with a habeas corpus petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 305(a). See ECF No. 19. On January 31, 2024, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition. ECF No. 41. After petitioner failed to respond, he was given an additional twenty-one days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the pending motion. ECF No. 42. In the same order, petitioner was informed that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Id. By order filed April 16, 2024, after petitioner once again failed to 27 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.