UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. 2:20-cv-9425-GW (SK) Date October 20, 2020 Title Quinton Marcel v. D. Davey

Present: The Honorable Steve Kim, U.S. Magistrate Judge Connie Chung n/a Deputy Clerk Court Smart / Recorder Attorneys Present for Petitioner: Attorneys Present for Respondent: None present None present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Petitioner is a California state prisoner who filed a “protective” petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his convictions for first degree residential burglary and other firearm and ammunition-related crimes. (ECF 1 at 1-2). But even a protective petition must “specify all the grounds for relief available to the petitioner” and “state the facts supporting each ground.” Rule 2(c) of Rules Governing § 2254 Cases. Here, Petitioner left that part of the form petition blank, specifying no grounds for relief. (Id. at 5-7). Petitioner cannot satisfy Rule 2(c) by attaching documents to the petition (ECF 3) with no explanation or incorporation by reference. See Blue v. Montgomery, 2019 WL 6194840, at *1 (C.D. Cal. June 5, 2019) (dismissing with leave to amend where petitioner attached state court filings but identified no claims in the petition). Though the Court liberally construes pro se pleadings, it cannot “engage in a tenuous analysis in order to attempt to identify and make sense of” the petition. Hines v. Napolitano, 2007 WL 2859745, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 26, 2007); see Hernandez v. Montgomery, 2020 WL 5875025, at *1 (C.D. Cal. July 6, 2020) (dismissing with leave to amend where petitioner “[left] the court and respondent to guess which grounds he intends to assert”). For these reasons, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE 0n or before November 19, 2020 why the petition should not be dismissed for failure to comply with Rule 2(c). To discharge this order, Petitioner must file a First Amended Petition that separately states each ground for relief and the constitutional basis for each claim. Form CV- 69, the Central District’s standard habeas petition, is attached for Petitioner’s use. Failure to comply with this order may lead to involuntary dismissal of the petition for failure to prosecute and obey court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 41-1.