Opinion
EDCV 21-1062 MEMF (PVC)
02-25-2022
Rudy Jay Burdick v. Raymond Madden, Warden
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Pedro V. Castillo, United States Magistrate Judge
PROCEEDINGS: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR A STAY PURSUANT TO RHINES V. WEBER SHOULD NOT BE DENIED AS MOOT AND EXTENDING TIME FOR RESPONDENT TO ANSWER THE PETITION
On June 20, 2021, Petitioner, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, constructively filed a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. ("Petition," Dkt. No. 1 at 8). The Petition included a request for a stay pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005), to exhaust Ground Four ("Motion for Stay"). (Id. at 51-65; see Dkt. No. 7 at 3-4, 11-24; see also Dkt. No. 13-11 (habeas petition filed in California Supreme Court)). On February 17, 2022, Respondent filed an opposition, in part, to the Motion for Stay. (Dkt. No. 12). It appears from a review of the public website, that on February 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court denied the habeas petition. As such. Petitioner's request pursuant to Rhines v. Weber to exhaust Ground Four may be moot. For this reason, the Court orders that Petitioner respond, in writing, within fourteen (14) days from the date of this Order, why his request for a stay pursuant to Rhines v. Weber should not be denied as moot.
Page citations to Petitioner's filings such as the Petition, which includes non-sequential pages and many attached exhibits, refer to the CM/ECF-generated page No. on the Court's docket.
See California Appellate Courts Case Information website, https://appellatecases. courtinfo.ca.gov, No. S271538 (see attached screenshot).
Additionally, Respondent's time to file an Answer to the Petition is hereby extended to March 29, 2022.
IT IS SO ORDERED.