Edgar Noe Mendez v. Daniel Paramo

Good Law
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…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.