Vasquez v. Frauenheim

Filing 12

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/06/22 ORDERING that within 14 days from the date of this order, petitioner shall show cause why the stay of this action should not be lifted, and this action be dismissed based on petitioner's failure to comply with court orders and to diligently prosecute this action.(Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SALVADOR B. VASQUEZ,

12

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

No. 2:17-cv-2579 KJN P

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

SCOTT FRAUENHEIM,

15

Respondent.

16
Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding pro se. On November 22, 2021, petitioner was

17
18

directed to file, within thirty days, a status report detailing his efforts to exhaust his state court

19

remedies. (ECF No. 11.) 1 Petitioner was cautioned that failure to file a status report or otherwise

20

respond to such order may result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to

21

comply with a court order or lack of prosecution. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

22

1

23
24
25
26
27
28

This court does not have access to Yolo County Superior Court records to determine the
outcome of the state appellate court’s order to show cause issued to the Yolo County Superior
Court on May 10, 2018. However, the website for the California Supreme Court confirms that as
of January 5, 2022, petitioner had not filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus raising his
unexhausted ineffective assistance of counsel claims. This court may take judicial notice of facts
that are “not subject to reasonable dispute because it . . . can be accurately and readily determined
from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned,” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b), including
undisputed information posted on official websites. Daniels-Hall v. National Education
Association, 629 F.3d 992, 999 (9th Cir. 2010). It is appropriate to take judicial notice of the
docket sheet of a California court. White v. Martel, 601 F.3d 882, 885 (9th Cir. 2010). The
address of the official website of the California state courts is www.courts.ca.gov.
1

1

Thirty days have now passed, and petitioner failed to file a status report or otherwise

2

respond to such order. 2 Therefore, within fourteen days from the date of this order, petitioner

3

shall show cause why the stay of this action should not be lifted, and this action dismissed based

4

on petitioner’s failure to comply with court orders and diligently prosecute this action. Failure to

5

show cause or otherwise respond to this order will result in a recommendation that this action be

6

dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962); Ferdik v.

7

Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992).

8

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within fourteen days from the date of this

9

order, petitioner shall show cause why the stay of this action should not be lifted, and this action

10

be dismissed based on petitioner’s failure to comply with court orders and to diligently prosecute

11

this action.

12

Dated: January 6, 2022

13
14
15

/vasq2579.osc

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

The CDCR website confirms that as of January 5, 2022, petitioner remains in state custody and
is housed at California State Prison, Solano, his current address of record. The Court may take
judicial notice of public records available on online inmate locators. See Pacheco v. Diaz, 2019
WL 5073594 at *2 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 4, 2019) (taking judicial notice of CDCR’s Inmate Locator
system); Foley v. Martz, 2018 WL 5111998, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2018) (same).
2