Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05547/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05547-0/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

G:\PRO-SE\MJJ\HC.07\stamos.osc.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES GEORGE STAMOS, JR.,

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN, 

Respondent. ______________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 07-5547 MJJ (PR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE;

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 in the Eastern District of California. He thereafter amended the

petition. On July 17, 2007, the court ordered the amended petition served upon respondent

and order to file an answer or motion to dismiss in response to the amended petition. 

Respondent was served and moved to transfer the case to this court, which motion was

granted. 

Good cause appearing, 

1. As respondent has already been served, the Clerk shall add respondent’s

attorney from the docket of the Eastern District of California, Case No. 07-1078 LEW EFB

P, to the docket of the instant matter, as follows: Brian G. Smiley, California Department of

Justice, Office of the Attorney General, 1300 I Street, Suite 1101, P.O. Box 944255,

Sacramento, California 94244-2250, (916) 324-5286, Fax: (916) 324-2960, Email:

Brian.Smiley@doj.ca.gov. The Clerk shall also serve a copy of the instant order on

respondent’s attorney. 

2. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner, within 90 days of

Case 3:07-cv-05547-VRW Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 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:\PRO-SE\MJJ\HC.07\stamos.osc.wpd 2

the date this order is filed, 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

granted based on the claims in the June 18, 2007 amended petition. Respondent shall file

with the answer and serve on petitioner 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 herein. 

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 30 days of his receipt of the answer.

3. Respondent may, within 90 days of the date this order is filed, file a motion to

dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee

Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. If respondent files such a

motion, petitioner shall file with the Court and serve on respondent an opposition or

statement of non-opposition within 30 days of receipt of the motion, and respondent shall file

with the Court and serve on petitioner a reply within 15 days of receipt of any opposition.

4. Petitioner is reminded that all communications with the Court must be served

on respondent by mailing a true copy of the document to respondent’s counsel. 

5. It is petitioner's responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep the

Court and respondent informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court's

orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

6. Upon a showing of good cause, requests for a reasonable extension of time will

be granted as long as they are filed on or before the deadline which they seek to extend.

7. As petitioner has already been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis,

petitioner may disregard the Clerk’s November 1, 2007 notice of IFP deficiency.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 11/26/07

 MARTIN J. JENKINS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-05547-VRW Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 Page 2 of 2