Parsons v. Arias

Background

Jason Thomas Parsons, identified as a state prisoner, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Section 2254 provides the procedure used for a state prisoner’s federal habeas petition. Parsons paid the full filing fee. The opinion does not describe the specific claims or relief requested in the petition.

The court stated that, based on the petition’s face, the action did not appear to be without merit. The case was assigned to Chief Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. The order also explained that, if all parties consent to magistrate-judge jurisdiction, Judge Ryu may conduct all proceedings and enter judgment; otherwise, the case will be reassigned to a district judge. Any appeal would go directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Orders

The court ordered the Clerk to serve the respondent and the respondent’s attorney, the California Attorney General, with the petition and the order, and to mail the order to Parsons.

Within 28 days after the order’s issuance, the respondent must state whether he consents to or declines magistrate-judge jurisdiction. The order says that withholding consent will not have adverse consequences and that the parties must follow the briefing schedule either way.

Within 60 days after the order’s issuance, the respondent must either:

- file and serve an answer complying with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, showing cause why the requested relief should not be granted, together with relevant previously transcribed state records; or - file and serve a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds instead of an answer.

If the respondent files an answer, Parsons may file and serve a traverse—a written response—within 28 days after receiving it. If the respondent files a motion to dismiss, Parsons may file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within 28 days, and the respondent may file a reply within 14 days after receiving an opposition.

The order states that Parsons is responsible for prosecuting the case, keeping the court and opposing counsel informed of any address change, complying with court orders, and serving opposing counsel with communications filed with the court. It also states that, under the local rule cited, a pro se action may be dismissed without prejudice if court mail is returned as undeliverable and the party does not provide a current address within 60 days. The court stated that extensions of time will be granted upon good cause if requested by the applicable deadline.

Disposition and significance

The court issued an order to show cause. It did not grant or deny the habeas petition and did not decide the merits of Parsons’s claims. The case was directed to proceed through an answer or a possible procedural motion to dismiss. This is therefore a procedural order, not a ruling on whether Parsons is entitled to habeas relief.