Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01262/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01262-2/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)

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL THOMAS DeARMOND, JR.,

Petitioner,

v.

C.E. DUCART,

Respondent.

No. 2:15-cv-1262 KJN P

ORDER

Petitioner is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner has consented to the jurisdiction of the 

undersigned. (ECF No. 4.) 

On September 1, 2015, the undersigned issued an order informing petitioner that this 

action could not proceed because none of the claims raised were exhausted. (ECF No. 7.) The 

undersigned also stated that it appeared that petitioner had exhausted some claims in a petition for 

review filed in the California Supreme Court, but none of these exhausted claims were raised in 

the instant action. (Id.) The undersigned granted petitioner thirty days to file an amended 

petition containing his exhausted and his unexhausted claims and a motion to stay this action. 

////

////

////

Case 2:15-cv-01262-KJN Document 8 Filed 10/09/15 Page 1 of 2
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

2

(Id.) Petitioner was informed that his failure to respond to this order would result in dismissal of 

this action.1 (Id.) 

Thirty days passed and petitioner did not respond to the September 1, 2015 order. 

Accordingly, the undersigned orders dismissal of this action because it contains only unexhausted 

claims. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270 (1971).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed.

Dated: October 9, 2015

De1262.dis

 

1

 In a previous order, the undersigned cautioned petitioner regarding the statute of limitations. 

(See ECF No. 5.)

Case 2:15-cv-01262-KJN Document 8 Filed 10/09/15 Page 2 of 2