Jose Sauceda-Contreras v. Marion Spearman

Filing 17

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER by Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams. The Court orders petitioner to file, no later than August 25, 2015, a supplemental response to the OSC that presents all argument and evidence that he wants the Court to consider in connection with his claim of equitable tolling based on the inability to understand English. *See Order for details.* (es)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES-GENERAL
Case No. SA CV 15-1117-JAK (PLA)

Date August 10, 2015

Title: Jose Sauceda-Contreras v. Marion Spearman, Warden
G U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
PRESENT: THE HONORABLE

PAUL L. ABRAMS

Christianna Howard
Deputy Clerk

: MAGISTRATE JUDGE

N/A
Court Reporter / Recorder

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PETITIONER:

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR RESPONDENT:

NONE
PROCEEDINGS:

N/A
Tape No.

NONE
(IN CHAMBERS)

The Court is in receipt of petitioner’s Response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) issued on July 20,
2015. Regarding petitioner’s argument that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the statute of limitations based
on his inability to understand English (see Response at 4-5), the Court finds that supplemental briefing from
petitioner is necessary. In Mendoza v. Carey, 449 F.3d 1065, 1070 (9th Cir. 2006), the Ninth Circuit concluded
that “a non-English-speaking petitioner seeking equitable tolling must, at a minimum, demonstrate that during
the running of the AEDPA time limitation, he was unable, despite diligent efforts, to procure either legal
materials in his own language or translation assistance from an inmate, library personnel, or other source.”
Petitioner in his Response has failed to make such a showing. Accordingly, the Court orders petitioner to file,
no later than August 25, 2015, a supplemental response to the OSC that presents all argument and evidence
that he wants the Court to consider in connection with his claim of equitable tolling based on the inability to
understand English.
The failure of petitioner to submit the supplemental response may result in the Court recommending that the
Petition be dismissed as untimely.
cc:

Counsel of record

Initials of Deputy Clerk

CV-90 (10/98)

CIVIL MINUTES -

GENERAL

ch