Mark Verba v. C. Wofford

Filing 27

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not dismiss this action for failure to prosecute or vacate the stay of this action. Petitioner must file a response to this Order no later than July 16, 2015. (See Order for complete details) (afe)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV-14-5679 -AS

Title

Mark Verba v. C. Wofford, Warden

Present: The
Honorable

Date

June 26, 2015

Alka Sagar, United States Magistrate Judge
Alma Felix

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Petitioner:

Attorneys Present for Respondent:

N/A

N/A

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On July 22, 2014, Petitioner Mark Verba (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
by a Person in State Custody (“Petition”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Docket Entry No. 1). On January
9, 2015, the Court issued an Order granting in part and denying in part Respondent’s motion to dismiss the
petition (Docket Entry No. 23 ). The Court dismissed Grounds Two and Four of the Petition because they
were procedurally defaulted and found Grounds Three and Five to be unexhausted. Id. On February 9,
2015, Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s Order dismissing Grounds Two and Four
and a Motion for a Stay of his unexhausted claims. (Docket Entry No. 24). On February 17, 2015, the
Court issued an Order Denying Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration and Granting Petitioner’s Motion
for a Stay, pursuant to Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir.2003) overruled on other grounds by Robbins
v. Crey, 481 F.3d 1143 (9th Cir. 2007). Accordingly, the Court dismissed Petitioner’s unexhausted claims
and stayed his remaining exhausted claims to permit Petitioner to present the unexhausted claims to the
California Supreme Court (Docket Entry No. 25). The Court ordered Petitioner to file status reports,
beginning April 20, 2015, and every sixty (60) thereafter, addressing the status of Petitioner’s state habeas
petition, including the date it was filed, the court in which it is pending, the case number and any recent
activity. Id. at 2.
To date, Petitioner has failed to file a status report informing the Court of the status of his state
habeas petition, in compliance with the Court’s Order.
Accordingly, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not dismiss this
action for failure to prosecute or vacate the stay of this action. Petitioner must file a response to this Order
no later than July 16, 2015. Any response to this Order must include the following information: the
status of Petitioner’s state habeas petition, including the date it was filed, the court in which it is
pending, the case number and any recent activity.
Petitioner is expressly warned that failure to file a timely response to this Order may result
in the Court’s dismissal of this action be dismissed with prejudice for his failure to comply with Court
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV-14-5679 -AS

Date

Title

June 26, 2015

Mark Verba v. C. Wofford, Warden

orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Rule 12, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts.

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2