Forbes v. Paramo

Filing 20

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/24/19 ORDERING that that petitioner shall, within 30 days from the date of this order, file a statement notifying the court whether he has a matter pending before the California Supreme Court or whether the Supreme Court has considered a habeas petition and ruled on it. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HOWARD FORBES,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-1884 MCE GGH P

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

DANIEL PARAMO,

15

Respondent.

16
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding in this case pro se. On August 16, 2016, the

17
18

undersigned issued an Order and Findings and Recommendations recommending, in pertinent

19

part, that the action be stayed pending the exhaustion of state court remedies. ECF No. 6. The

20

presiding District Judge adopted the Findings and Recommendations and granted a stay of this

21

proceeding on January 5, 2017. ECF No. 12. On August 7, 2017, the undersigned issued an

22

order requiring petitioner to file a statement notifying the court whether he had a matter pending

23

before the California Supreme Court or that the Supreme Court had considered a habeas petition

24

and ruled on it within 30 days. ECF No. 13. On August 23, 2017 and September 7, 2017,

25

petitioner provided the court with case statuses on his state court exhaustion proceedings. ECF

26

Nos. 14, 15. In petitioner’s September 7, 2017 “status update,” petitioner had indicated to the

27

court that his petition was in the Solano County Superior Court and was pending a resolution.

28

////
1

1

ECF No. 15. However, to date, petitioner has not updated the court on the status of his

2

exhaustion efforts.

3

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner shall, within 30 days

4

from the date of this order, file a statement notifying the court whether he has a matter pending

5

before the California Supreme Court or whether the Supreme Court has considered a habeas

6

petition and ruled on it. Petitioner is warned that failure to comply with this order will result in a

7

recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9

Dated: January 24, 2019

10

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2