Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01563/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01563-4/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)

---

1

3:18-cv-1563-MMA-AHG

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

GILBERT JOSEPH BATES,

Petitioner,

v.

DANIEL A. PARAMO, WARDEN,

Respondent.

Case No.: 3:18-cv-1563-MMA-AHG

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING 

SCHEDULE RE: CLAIM ONE OF 

THE PETITION

On July 31, 2018, Petitioner Gilbert Joseph Bates (“Petitioner”), proceeding pro se

and in forma pauperis, submitted his First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which raised six claims. ECF No. 5. On November 9, 2018, 

Respondent Daniel A. Paramo (“Respondent”) filed his Motion to Dismiss. ECF No. 12. 

On August 16, 2019, the Court denied Respondent’s motion without prejudice, finding that 

Petitioner had filed a mixed petition, i.e., containing both exhausted and unexhausted 

claims. ECF Nos. 17, 22. Thereafter, the Court set a briefing schedule for Petitioner to file

a motion for stay and abeyance regarding his unexhausted claims. ECF Nos. 24, 27. On 

March 26, 2020, Petitioner filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the unexhausted claims

(claims 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6), which the Court granted. ECF Nos. 29, 30. Thus, only Claim 1

remains. See ECF No. 5 at 6–8 (in Claim 1, Petitioner argues that the trial court abused its 

discretion when it found that Petitioner presented an unreasonable risk to public safety and 

Case 3:18-cv-01563-MMA-AHG Document 31 Filed 04/01/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 4
2

3:18-cv-1563-MMA-AHG

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

denied his petition for resentencing under Proposition 36).

In accordance with Rule 4 of the rules governing petitions for a writ of habeas corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and upon a preliminary review of Claim 1 of the First 

Amended Petition, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. If Respondent contends that Claim 1 of the First Amended Petition can be 

decided without the Court’s reaching the merits of Petitioner’s claims (e.g., because 

Respondent contends Petitioner has failed to exhaust any state remedies as to any ground 

for relief alleged in the Petition, or that the Petition is barred by the statute of limitations, 

or that the Petition is subject to dismissal under Rule 9 of the Rules Governing § 2254 

Cases, or that all of the claims are procedurally defaulted, or that Petitioner is not in 

custody), Respondent shall file a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules 

Governing § 2254 Cases no later than June 2, 2020. The motion to dismiss shall not address 

the merits of Petitioner’s claims, but rather shall address all grounds upon which 

Respondent contends dismissal without reaching the merits of Petitioner’s claims is 

warranted. At the time the motion to dismiss is filed, Respondent shall lodge with the Court 

all records bearing on Respondent’s contention in this regard. A hearing date is not required 

for the motion to dismiss.

2. If Respondent files a motion to dismiss, Petitioner shall file his opposition, if 

any, to the motion no later than July 6, 2020. At the time the opposition is filed, Petitioner 

shall lodge with the Court any records not lodged by Respondent which Petitioner believes 

may be relevant to the Court’s determination of the motion. If Plaintiff does not wish to 

oppose Defendant’s Motion, Plaintiff should file and serve a “Notice of Non-Opposition” 

also by July 6, 2020 to let the Court know that Defendants’ Motion is unopposed. Plaintiff 

is cautioned that failure to file an opposition to any motion by the deadline ordered may 

constitute a consent to the granting of the motion. CivLR 7.1(f)(2)(b).

3. Unless the Court orders otherwise, Respondent shall not file a reply to 

Petitioner’s opposition to a motion to dismiss. If the motion is denied, the Court will afford 

Respondent adequate time to respond to Petitioner’s claims on the merits.

Case 3:18-cv-01563-MMA-AHG Document 31 Filed 04/01/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 4
3

3:18-cv-1563-MMA-AHG

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

4. If Respondent does not contend that Claim 1 of the First Amended Petition 

can be decided without the Court reaching the merits of Petitioner’s claims, Respondent 

shall file and serve an answer to the Petition, as well as points and authorities in support of 

such answer, no later than June 2, 2020. At the time the answer is filed, Respondent shall 

lodge with the Court all records bearing on the merits of Petitioner’s claims. The lodgments 

shall be accompanied by a notice of lodgment which shall be captioned “Notice of 

Lodgment in 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Habeas Corpus Case — To Be Sent to Clerk’s Office.” 

Respondent shall not combine separate pleadings, orders or other items into a combined 

lodgment entry. Each item shall be numbered separately and sequentially.

5. Petitioner may file a traverse to matters raised in the answer no later than 

July 6, 2020. Any traverse by Petitioner (a) shall state whether Petitioner admits or denies 

each allegation of fact contained in the answer; (b) shall be limited to facts or arguments 

responsive to matters raised in the answer; and (c) shall not raise new grounds for relief 

that were not asserted in the Petition. Grounds for relief withheld until the traverse will not 

be considered. No traverse shall exceed ten (10) pages in length absent advance leave of 

Court for good cause shown.

6. A request by a party for an extension of time within which to file any of the 

pleadings required by this Order should be made in advance of the due date of the pleading, 

and the Court will grant such a request only upon a showing of good cause. Any such 

request shall be accompanied by a declaration under penalty of perjury explaining why an 

extension of time is necessary.

7. Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, this case shall be deemed submitted 

on the day following the date Petitioner’s opposition to a motion to dismiss and/or his 

traverse is due.

8. Every document delivered to the Court must include a certificate of service 

attesting that a copy of such document was served on opposing counsel (or on the opposing 

party, if such party is not represented by counsel). Any document delivered to the Court 

without a certificate of service will be returned to the submitting party and disregarded by 

Case 3:18-cv-01563-MMA-AHG Document 31 Filed 04/01/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 3 of 4
4

3:18-cv-1563-MMA-AHG

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.

9. Petitioner shall immediately notify the Court and counsel for Respondent of 

any change of Petitioner’s address. If Petitioner fails to keep the Court informed of where 

Petitioner may be contacted, this action will be subject to dismissal for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 1, 2020

Case 3:18-cv-01563-MMA-AHG Document 31 Filed 04/01/20 PageID.<pageID> Page 4 of 4