Tyshaun Andrew Jackson v. Warren L. Montgomery

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case 2:20-cv-04461-DOC-GJS Date October 23, 2023 No. Title Tyshaun Andrew Jackson v. Warren L. Montgomery Present: Hon. Gail J. Standish, United States Magistrate Judge E. Quintero N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Petitioner: Attorneys Present for Respondent: None present None present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why Rhines Stay Should Not Be Vacated On June 18, 2020, at Petitioner’s request, the Court issued an Order granting a Rhines' stay in this case [Dkt. 7, “Stay Order”]. The Stay Order provided that, “[w]ithin days of this Order and every 60 days thereafter, Petitioner must file a brief Status Report, in which he advises the Court of the status of his state habeas proceeding(s).”

The Stay Order also provided that “Petitioner is cautioned that the failure to comply with these requirements may result in the Court ordering the stay to be vacated nunc pro tunc.”

It is now over four months since Petitioner — who 1s represented by counsel — filed his last Status Report. Accordingly, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Rhines stay in this case should not be vacated nunc pro tunc. By no later than November 6, 2023, Petitioner shall file a Response to this Order To Show Cause explaining why the Rhines stay should continue. Alternatively, by that same November 6, 2023 deadline, Petitioner simply may file the required Status Report. The failure to comply will result in the vacating of the Rhines stay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

See Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005).