Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-02038/USCOURTS-casd-3_14-cv-02038-0/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)

---

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DANIEL WILLIAM MAY, Civil No. 14CV2038-BEN(JMA)

Petitioner,

ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR

“STAY IN ABEYANCE” 

[DOC. NO. 3]

v.

ERIC ARNOLD, Warden, et al.,

Respondent.

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 28, 2014, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus, a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, and a document titled:

“Request for Stay in Abeyance.” [Doc. Nos. 1, 2 & 3.] Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to Proceed

In Forma Pauperis, was granted by the Hon. Roger T. Benitez on September 8, 2014 [Doc. No.

3] and Petitioner’s request for “stay in abeyance” was referred to the undersigned. 

The stay and abeyance procedure is one of several options a habeas petitioner who files 

a “mixed petition” (meaning a habeas petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted

claims) may choose to pursue in order to permit the petitioner to return to state court to exhaust

additional claims while the federal proceedings are stayed. Rhines v. Weber 544 U.S. 269, 125

S.Ct. 1528, 1534-35 (2005). Here, although Petitioner requests a “stay in abeyance,” the purpose

of his request is not to exhaust claims in the state court system, but rather to allow him time to

gather documents in support of his Petition. 

Case 3:14-cv-02038-BEN-JMA Document 5 Filed 09/11/14 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

The Court has concurrently issued an Order Requiring Response to Petition and setting

briefing deadlines for Respondents to either file a motion to dismiss or an answer. As outlined

in that Order, Petitioner is not required to make any further filings in support of his Petition until

either December 1, 2014 (if Respondents file a motion to dismiss) or December 17, 2014 (if

Respondents file an answer to the Petition). As no action is required of Petitioner for two and

a half to three months, there is no basis to stay this proceeding in order to allow Petitioner time

to acquire documents. If Petitioner is unable to obtain the documents he needs to respond to

Respondents’ motion to dismiss or answer, Petitioner may file a motion requesting his deadline

to respond be extended. Petitioner’s motion for “stay in abeyance” is, therefore, denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: September 11, 2014

Jan M. Adler

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-02038-BEN-JMA Document 5 Filed 09/11/14 Page 2 of 2