Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-03293/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-03293-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DU LE,

Petitioner,

 v.

V.M. ALMAGER, Warden,

Respondent. /

No. C 08-3293 SBA (PR)

ORDER LIFTING STAY AND DIRECTING

RESPONDENT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY

THE WRIT SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED

Petitioner, a state prisoner, has filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254.

On November 14, 2008, the Court issued an Order granting Petitioner's request for a stay of

proceedings while he returned to state court to exhaust his administrative remedies. On January 25,

2010, Petitioner informed the Court that his state proceedings had concluded, and he filed a first

amended habeas petition containing his exhausted claims. (Docket 21.)

Before the Court is Petitioner's motion to lift the stay of proceedings and implied motion for

leave to file his first amended petition. 

Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the motion to lift the stay and GRANTS

Petitioner leave to file his first amended petition. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mark

Petitioner's first amended petition as filed on January 22, 2010, the date it was received.

Case 4:08-cv-03293-SBA Document 25 Filed 02/17/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

G:\Sbalc2\Keith\Prisoner\08-3293 - Le - Order Lifting Stay and OSC.wpd 2

The Clerk of the Court shall REOPEN this case and serve a copy of this Order and the first

amended petition and all attachments thereto upon Respondent and Respondent's attorney, the

Attorney General of the State of California. 

Respondent shall file with this Court and serve upon Petitioner, within sixty (60) days of the

issuance of this Order, an answer conforming in all respects to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why a writ of habeas corpus should not be issued. Respondent

shall file with the answer a copy of all portions of the state trial record that have been transcribed

previously and that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the petition. 

If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with the

Court and serving it on Respondent within thirty (30) days of his receipt of the answer. Otherwise,

the petition will be deemed submitted and ready for decision thirty days after the date Petitioner is

served with Respondent's answer. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the Court,

whether by way of formal legal motions or informal letters, must be through his counsel. 

Extensions of time are not favored, though reasonable extensions will be granted. Any

motion for an extension of time must be filed no later than seven (7) days prior to the deadline

sought to be extended.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 2/5/10 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:08-cv-03293-SBA Document 25 Filed 02/17/10 Page 2 of 2