Knight v. Virga

Filing 49

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Habeas Answer due by 2/1/2016. Signed by Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong on 12/02/2015. (tmiS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/3/2015)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3

OAKLAND DIVISION

4
5

TENACE D. KNIGHT,
Petitioner,

6

Case No. 10-cv-00276-SBA (PR)
Ninth Cir. Case Nos. 11-17350, 14-16262

v.
7
8

SECOND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
ROBERT H. THIMBLE, Acting Warden,
Respondents.

9
10

Petitioner Tenace Knight, a state prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state court conviction for attempted

12

second degree robbery and numerous other criminal charges. Thereafter, Petitioner filed

13

an amended petition, which is the operative petition. Dkt. 7. The Court, upon motion of

14

Respondent, previously dismissed the action on the grounds that the amended petition was

15

not filed within the one-year limitations period prescribed by the Antiterrorism and

16

Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. Dkt. 19. On June 16, 2014, the Court denied

17

Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment of Dismissal Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

18

60(b)(6). Dkt. 37.

19

On November 5, 2015, the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of

20

the amended petition as untimely and the denial of Petitioner’s Rule 60(b)(6) motion. Dkt.

21

46. On November 30, 2015, the Ninth Circuit issued its mandate. Dkt. 48.

22

The instant matter has since been remanded to this Court for a determination of the

23

merits of the claims in the amended petition. As the Court has previously determined in its

24

June 22, 2010 Order to Show Cause, it does not appear from the face of the amended

25

petition that it is without merit. Good cause appearing, the Court hereby issues the

26

following orders:

27
28

1.

Respondent shall file with this Court and serve upon Petitioner, within sixty

(60) days of the issuance of this Order, an Answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of

1

the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus

2

should not be issued. Respondent shall file with the Answer a copy of all portions of the

3

relevant state records that have been transcribed previously and that are relevant to a

4

determination of the issues presented by the amended petition.

5

2.

If Petitioner wishes to respond to the Answer, he shall do so by filing a

6

Traverse with the Court and serving it on Respondent within sixty (60) days of his receipt

7

of the Answer. Should Petitioner fail to do so, the amended petition will be deemed

8

submitted and ready for decision sixty (60) days after the date Petitioner is served with

9

Respondent’s Answer.

10

3.

It is Petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

the Court and Respondent informed of any change of address and must comply with the

12

Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Petitioner must also serve on Respondent’s counsel all

13

communications with the Court by mailing a true copy of the document to Respondent’s

14

counsel. Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 3-11 a party proceeding pro se whose

15

address changes while an action is pending must promptly file a notice of change of

16

address specifying the new address. See L.R. 3-11(a). The Court may dismiss a pro se

17

action without prejudice when: (1) mail directed to the pro se party by the Court has been

18

returned to the Court as not deliverable, and (2) the Court fails to receive within sixty days

19

of this return a written communication from the pro se party indicating a current address.

20

See L.R. 3-11(b); see also Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule

21

41(b) applicable in habeas cases).

22

4.

Extensions of time are not favored, though reasonable extensions will be

23

granted. Any motion for an extension of time must be filed no later than fourteen (14)

24

days prior to the deadline sought to be extended.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: 12/2/15

26

______________________________
SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG
Senior United States District Judge

27
28

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\HC.10\Knight0276.2ndOSCafterMandate.docx

2