(HC) Baca v. Robertson ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JAMES MARTIN BACA, No. 2:22-cv-01481 TLN KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 14 JAMES ROBERTSON, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner, proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis, with a petition for a 18 writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 5, 2022, petitioner was 19 granted an additional thirty days to file a request for stay that addressed the three elements 20 required to seek a stay under Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005). (ECF No. 11.) Thirty days 21 passed, and petitioner has not renewed his motion for stay or otherwise responded to the court’s 22 order. Therefore, petitioner shall show cause why the court should not strike the unexhausted 23 claims and proceed solely on petitioner’s first three claims that were exhausted by their inclusion 24 in the petition for review filed in the California Supreme Court. If petitioner again seeks a stay 25 under Rhines, he must include his motion and supporting facts as explained in the prior order. 26 (ECF No. 11.) 27 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner is granted thirty days to show 28 cause why the court should not issue an order striking the unexhausted claims and proceeding 1 | solely on petitioner’s first three claims that were exhausted by their inclusion in the petition for 2 || review filed in the California Supreme Court. Failure to comply with this order will result in the 3 || court issuing such an order to strike. 4 | Dated: January 24, 2023 Foci) Aharon 6 KENDALL J. NE /bacal481.ose UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28