Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza v. James Robertson
| Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza |
| James Robertson |
| 5:2018cv02560 |
| December 6, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Steve Kim |
| Josephine L Staton |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 29, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR STAY by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. Petitioner has filed a motion pursuant to Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2003), to stay the instant proceedings while he exhausts state court remedies. (ECF #7 ). Therefore, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. The Clerk will promptly serve copies of the petition and this Order on the Attorney General for the State of California. The Clerk will also serve a copy of this Order on Petitioner, along with a Consent to Magistrate jurisdiction form. The assigned Deputy Attorney General must file a notice of appearance in the action within 14 days from the date of this Order. Also by that time, the Attorney General shall file a notice of consent (or nonconsent) to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. No adverse substantive consequences exist for any party declining consent to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. 2. If Respondent opposes the motion, he shall file his opposition by February 22, 2019. Petitioners optional reply in support of the motion to shall be due within 14 days of service of Respondents opposition. 3. If Respondent does not oppose the motion, Respondent shall file a notice of nonopposition by no later than February 22, 2019. 4. The deadline for Respondents response to the Petition is deferred until the resolution of the motion for stay, at which point the Court shall set an appropriate briefing schedule. (Attachments: #1 Petition, #2 Petitioner Signed Consent, #3 Motion for Stay, #4 Form Consent CV11B) (clee)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION Requesting a Stay and Abeyance Under Kelly Procedure i.e. Response to Show Cause filed by Petitioner Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza. (hr) |
|
Filing 6
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. THEREFORE, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before January 25, 2019 why this action should not be dismissed as mixed and untimely. It remains Petitioners burden to establish exhaustion and timeliness on any ground on which the Court may be unaware. See Stancle v. Clay, 692 F.3d 948, 953 (9th Cir. 2012) Rollins v. Sup. Ct of Los Angeles, 706 F. Supp. 2d 1008, 1011 (C.D. Cal. 2010). Importantly, even if Petitioner elects to strike any unexhausted claims, he must still demonstrate that the remaining exhausted claims are timely. If Petitioner does not file a timely response to this Order to Show Cause, the Court may also recommend involuntary dismissal of the Petition for failure to prosecute or obey court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P 41(b) L.R. 411. If Petitioner no longer wishes to pursue this action, he may voluntarily dismiss the action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) by filing a Voluntary Notice of Dismissal. The Clerk is directed to provide Petitioner with a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Form CV009. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS). (Attachments: #1 Voluntary Dismissal CV-009) (clee)
|
|
Filing 5
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER RE: REQUEST TO PROCEED WITHOUT PREPAYMENT OF FILING FEES by Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. The Court is in receipt of Petitioner's Declaration in Support of Request to Proceed In Forma Pauperis contained within the Petition. (ECF No. #1 ). The request is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. (clee)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Josephine L. Staton and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (Attachments: #1 CV-111) (lh) |
| Filing 3 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Petitioner Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza, re Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254) #1 served on 11/25/2018. (lh) |
| Filing 2 ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT TO PROCEED before Magistrate Judge, in accordance with Title 28 Section 636(c) and F.R.CIV.P 73(b), filed by Petitioner Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza. (lh) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In State Custody (28:2254). Case assigned to Judge Josephine L. Staton and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (Filing Fee $ 5 Due), filed by Petitioner Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza. (lh) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza v. James Robertson | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Gabriel Cuevas Cardoza | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: James Robertson | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
