Warden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 JEFFREY TODD EASTMAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-1107-TLN-JDP (P) Petitioner, v. ORDER WARDEN, Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a state prisoner, brought this action under section 2254. ECF No. 1. Then, he filed a motion seeking a stay under Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), wherein he acknowledged that the petition contained only unexhausted claims. ECF No. 7. I recommended that the motion be denied, as a Rhines stay is unavailable where a petition contains only unexhausted claims. ECF No. 8. Those recommendations were adopted by the district judge. ECF No. 9. Now, petitioner must indicate how he intends to proceed. A federal court cannot consider claims that have not been exhausted in state court. Before recommending dismissal based on a complete failure to exhaust, however, I will allow petitioner to file an amended habeas petition that explains the status of his claims with respect to exhaustion and why, if they remain 27 …