Dennis Petillo, Jr. v. Patrice Silvermen

Filing 6

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. As of today's date, Petitioner has failed to file a Response to the Court's January 4, 2017 Order. Accordingly, Petitioner is HEREBY ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be d ismissed as a fully unexhausted petition. Petitioner must file a response to this Order withing twenty (20) days of the date of this Order (by no later than February 27, 2017). (See Minute Order for complete details) (Attachments: # 1 Courts January 4, 2017 Order) (afe)

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

CV 16-09551-JFW (AS)

Title

Dennis Petillo Jr. V. Patrice Silverman

Present: The Honorable

Date

February 7, 2017

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 December 27, 2016, Dennis Petillo, Jr. (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus (“Petition”). (Docket Entry No. 1). The Petition, in at least two separate
claims, appears to assert the following ground for federal habeas relief: Petitioner has been
harassed and tortured, in violation of the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth
Amendment. (See Petition at 3-4, Attachment at 1-2).
On January 4, 2017, the Court issued an Order requiring Petitioner to select, by
January 24, 2017, one of two options, because (as Petitioner had conceded) the sole ground
alleged in the Petition was unexhausted. (Docket Entry No. 5). Specifically, the Court
ordered Petitioner to either: (1) voluntarily dismiss the entire action without prejudice; or
(2) request a stay of the Petition, pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277-78 (2005),
while he returns to state court to exhaust his unexhausted claim. Id. at 3-4. Petitioner was
expressly advised that his failure to file a timely response to the Court’s January 4, 2017
Order might result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice for his
failure to prosecute and/or obey Court orders pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Id. at 4.
Petitioner further was expressly advised that his failure to select one of the two options
identified in the Court’s January 4, 2017 Order might result in the dismissal of the Petition
as a fully unexhausted petition. Id.
As of today’s date, Petitioner has failed to file a Response to the Court’s January 4,
2017 Order.
Accordingly, Petitioner is HEREBY ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this
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 16-09551-JFW (AS)

Date

Title

February 7, 2017

Dennis Petillo Jr. V. Patrice Silverman

action should not be dismissed as a fully unexhausted petition.
Petitioner may file a response to this Order by availing himself of one of the two
options set forth in the Court’s January 4, 2017 Order: (1) voluntary dismissal of the entire
action without prejudice; or (2) moving for a stay of this action pursuant to Rhines v.
Weber, supra, while he returns to the state courts to exhaust the unexhausted claim, as
identified above.
Information regarding the requirements for, and potential consequences of, each of
these options are explained in the Court’s January 4, 2017 Order, a copy of which is
attached.
Petitioner must file a response to this Order withing twenty (20) days of the date of
this Order (by no later than February 27, 2017) .
Petitioner is warned that failure to comply with this Order will result in a
recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice for his failure to
prosecute and/or comply with Court orders pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) and/or
dismissal without prejudice as a fully unexhausted petition.

0
Initials

:

0

AF

of Preparer

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2