Thomas Enrico DeFelice v. Trent Allen

Filing 32

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE by Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin. Petitioner is ordered to file a status report regarding his efforts to exhaust his state court remedies by March 18, 2025, or show cause why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Petitioner is expressly advised that if he does not file a status report by the Courts deadline or respond to this order, the Court will recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and obey Court orders. (Attachments: # 1 CV09- Notice of Dismissal Form) (et)

Case 2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Document 32 Filed 03/04/25
#:2133

Page 1 of 3 Page ID

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

2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Date: March 4, 2025
Page 1 of 3

Title:

Thomas Enrico DeFelice v. Trent Allen

DOCKET ENTRY: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD
NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

PRESENT:
HONORABLE A. JOEL RICHLIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
_ Claudia Garcia-Marquez_

_______None_______

__None__

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter/Recorder

Tape No.

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PETITIONER:

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR RESPONDENT:

None Present

None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)
On January 29, 2024, pro se Petitioner Thomas Enrico DeFelice (“Petitioner”), a
California state prisoner then confined at Salinas Valley State Prison in Soledad,
California, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254
(“Petition”). (Dkt. 1.) On September 20, 2024, this Court issued an order staying
Petitioner’s case pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 276 (2005), so that Petitioner
could exhaust his state court remedies. (Dkt. 26.) As conditions of the stay, the Court
ordered Petitioner to:
1. File a state habeas petition in the California Supreme Court setting forth the
Petition’s unexhausted ground no later than October 20, 2024.

Case 2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Document 32 Filed 03/04/25
#:2134

Page 2 of 3 Page ID

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

2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Title:

Thomas Enrico DeFelice v. Trent Allen

Date: March 4, 2025
Page 2 of 3

2. File with this Court, a Notice of Filing State Habeas Petition and attach a copy
of the state habeas petition (without exhibits) no later than October 28, 2024.
3. File a status report in this Court no later than September 20, 2024, informing the
Court of his progress in exhausting his state court remedies. This Court further
ordered Petitioner to file further status reports every sixty (60) days following
his first status report until the California Supreme Court issues its decision.
(Id. at 6-7.)
Petitioner was warned that failure to comply with the conditions of the stay order
could result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to
prosecute. Petitioner filed a Notice of Filing State Habeas Petition on October 17, 2024.
(Dkt. 27.) Petitioner subsequently filed status reports on October 28, 2023 and December
23, 2024. (Dkts. 28, 30.) Petitioner’s most recent status report states “[t]he next report is
due 2-25-2025.” (Dkt. 30 at 1.) Accordingly, a week has passed since Petitioner’s
deadline to file a status report regarding his efforts to exhaust is state court remedies and
no status report has been received.
Petitioner is ordered to file a status report regarding his efforts to exhaust his state
court remedies by March 18, 2025, or show cause why this action should not be
dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Petitioner is expressly advised that if
he does not file a status report by the Court’s deadline or respond to this order, the
Court will recommend that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute and obey Court orders.
If Petitioner no longer wishes to pursue this action, he may voluntarily dismiss the action
by filing a Notice of Dismissal in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1). A form Notice of Dismissal is attached for Petitioner’s convenience.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Document 32 Filed 03/04/25
#:2135

Page 3 of 3 Page ID

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

2:24-cv-00850-AH-AJR

Title:

Thomas Enrico DeFelice v. Trent Allen

Date: March 4, 2025
Page 3 of 3

Attachment:
CV-09, Notice of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a) or (c).