This case presents question as to whether trial court properly dismissed sua sponte defendant’s section 2-1401 petition, where trial court found that it was filed beyond applicable two-year limitations period, and that petition lacked merit. Appellate Court noted that defendant had failed to properly serve instant section 2-1401 petition by sending it via first-class mail, rather than certified mail as required under Rule 105, but that govt. had waived any issue regarding lack of proper service, where Assistant State’s Attorney appeared in court and failed to raise said issue. Appellate Court, though, further found that instant dismissal was premature, where: (1) it occurred within relevant 30-day period after initial appearance by Assistant State’s Attorney; (2) govt. had not filed response to petition at time of dismissal, and record otherwise failed to indicate when govt. had been served with section 2-1401 petition; and (3) Rule 105 allows responding party 30 days to file response to instant section 2-1401 petition. On remand, govt. may expressly waive 30-day time period to file response and consent to sua sponte decision by trial court on merits of petition.