Ruoff v. Covello

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JOSHUA RICHARD RUOFF, Case No. 22-cv-01207-JST

8 Petitioner, SCHEDULING ORDER v. 9

10 PATRICK COVELLO, Respondent. 11

12 13 Petitioner Joshua Richard Ruoff, an incarcerated person at Mule Creek State Prison, filed 14 this action seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. His petition is now 15 before the Court for review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243 and Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 16 Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. 17 This Court may entertain a petitioner for writ of habeas corpus “in behalf of a person in 18 custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in 19 violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). A 20 district court shall “award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why 21 the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person 22 detained is not entitled thereto.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. “Summary dismissal is appropriate only 23 where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory or palpably incredible, or patently 24 frivolous or false.” Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990) (quotation marks, 25 alteration marks, and citations omitted). 26 None of the claims raised in the petition warrants summary dismissal. However, Petitioner 27 acknowledges that not all of his claims are exhausted and states an intent to “seek a stay of these 1 to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005).” ECF No. 1 at 8. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that: 2 1. The Clerk shall serve electronically a copy of this order upon Respondent and 3 || Respondent’s attorney, the Attorney General of the State of California, at the following email 4 address: SFAWTParalegals @doj.ca.gov. The petition and the exhibits thereto are available via 5 || the Electronic Case Filing System for the Northern District of California. 6 2. Petitioner shall file his motion to stay within 28 days of the date of this order. 7 || Respondent shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within 21 days of the date the 8 motion is filed. Petitioner may file a reply within 14 days of the date the opposition is filed. The 9 || motion to stay will then be deemed under submission without oral argument unless otherwise 10 || ordered. 11 3. The Court will defer setting a schedule for Respondent to answer the petition until 12 || after it rules on Petitioner’s stay motion. 13 4. Upon a showing of good cause, requests for reasonable extensions of time will be 14 || granted provided they are filed on or before the deadline they seek to extend. 3 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. A 16 Dated: March 8, 2022 C □ A 2 .

M JON S. TIGAR 18 nited States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28