Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05017/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-05017-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Eric Arnold
Respondent
Cesar Rodelas
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CESAR RODELAS,

Petitioner,

v.

ERIC ARNOLD, Warden,

Respondent.

Case No. 14-cv-05017-JST (PR) 

ORDER LIFTING STAY; REOPENING 

CASE; TO SHOW CAUSE

Re: Dkt. No. 5

Petitioner, a prisoner of the State of California proceeding pro se, has filed a habeas corpus 

petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 setting forth two claims challenging the constitutionality of 

his state court conviction. His motion to stay the case to allow him to exhaust the claims in state

court was granted. He has filed a notice that he has exhausted the claims in which he requests that 

the stay be lifted and that he be allowed to proceed with the petition. 

The Court previously found the two claims, when liberally construed, to be cognizable. 

See Dkt. No. 4.

For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown:

1. The stay is LIFTED. The Clerk shall reopen the file. 

2. The Clerk shall mail a copy of this order and the petition with all attachments to the 

respondent and the respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California. The 

Clerk shall also serve a copy of this order on petitioner. 

3. Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner, within ninety-one (91)

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 granted. 

Respondent shall file with the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all portions of the state 

Case 3:14-cv-05017-JST Document 6 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

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-five (35) days of the date the answer is filed.

4. Respondent may file, within ninety-one (91) days, 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 twenty-eight 

(28) days of the date the motion is filed, and respondent shall file with the Court and serve on 

petitioner a reply within fourteen (14) days of the date any opposition is filed.

5. 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. Petitioner must keep 

the Court 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). See Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 

1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases). 

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

granted provided they are filed on or before the deadline they seek to extend.

This order terminates Docket No. 5.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2015

______________________________________

JON S. TIGAR

United States District Judge

Case 3:14-cv-05017-JST Document 6 Filed 04/17/15 Page 2 of 2