Edgar Noe Mendez v. Daniel Paramo
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaDecember 30, 20192:18-cv-05443California919 words
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
‘UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. CV 18-5443 JFW (SS) Date: December 30, 2019 Page 1 of 3
Title: Edgar Noe Mendez v. Daniel Paramo, Warden
DOCKET ENTRY: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE MAGISTRATE
JUDGE SHOULD NOT RECOMMEND THAT THIS
HABEAS ACTION BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE AND/OR FAILURE TO EXHAUST HIS
CLAIMS
PRESENT:
HONORABLE SUZANNE H. SEGAL, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
_Marlene Ramirez_ _______None_______ __None__ Deputy Clerk Court Reporter/Recorder Tape No.
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PETITIONER: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR RESPONDENT:
None Present None Present
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)
On May 1, 2019, the Court granted Petitioner’s Motion for Stay and stayed the case pursuant to Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2002). (Dkt. No. 25). The Court ordered Petitioner to: (1) promptly pursue exhaustion of Grounds 3-5 by filing habeas petitions in the California courts; and (2) file timely status reports in this Court, beginning on April 15, 2019, and every forty-five days thereafter, setting forth the…