Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01872/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-01872-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Derral Adams
Respondent
Robert Gonzales Galvan
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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT GONZALES GALVAN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

DERRAL ADAMS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:09-cv-01872-JLT HC

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE

PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED

FOR PETITIONER’S FAILURE TO OBEY

THE COURT’S ORDER

ORDER DIRECTING THAT PETITIONER

FILE A RESPONSE WITHIN TWENTY DAYS 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for

writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On October 26, 2009, Petitioner filed his

written consent to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge for all purposes. (Doc.

3). 

The instant petition was filed on October 23, 2009. (Doc. 1). After conducting an initial

review of the petition, on January 19, 2010 the Court ordered Petitioner to file an amended

petition on a proper habeas corpus form approved by the Court. The Order instructed Petitioner 1

that the amended petition had to include all of the information required by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)

and identified by the Court in it’s order. (Doc. 6). The Court ordered Petitioner to file his

A copy of a Court-approved habeas corpus petition form was sent to Petitioner along with the order dated

1

January 19, 2010.

1

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 7 Filed 04/05/10 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

amended petition within thirty days, i.e., by February 22, 2010. Well over a month has elapsed

since that deadline passed, yet Petitioner has not filed an amended petition, he has not requested

an extension of time to file an amended petition, nor has he communicated in any way with the

Court. The Court’s January 19, 2010 order expressly stated that “Petitioner is forewarned that

his failure to comply with this order may result in a Recommendation that the Petition be

dismissed pursuant to Local Rule 110.” (Doc. 6, p. 4). 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner is HEREBY ORDERED to Show Cause within

twenty (20) days of the date of service of this Order why the petition should not be dismissed for

Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s January 19, 2010 order to file an amended

petition. 

Petitioner is forewarned that his failure to comply with this order will result in an

order dismissing the Petition pursuant to Local Rule 110.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 2, 2010 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

9j7khi UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

2

Case 1:09-cv-01872-JLT Document 7 Filed 04/05/10 Page 2 of 2