Horn

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 BEAU GLAVE, Case No. 1:25-cv-01253-SAB-HC

12 Petitioner, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED

13 v. FOR FAILURE TO EXHAUST STATE

COURT REMEDIES

14 P. HORN, et al.,

15 Respondents.

16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 18 challenging pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 19 Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases requires preliminary review of a 20 habeas petition and allows a district court to dismiss a petition before the respondent is ordered 21 to file a response, if it “plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the 22 petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 23 Cases in the United States District Courts, 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254. 24 A petitioner in state custody who is proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 25 must exhaust state judicial remedies. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). The exhaustion doctrine is based…