The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sandra M. Snyder United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER REQUIRING RESPONDENT TO FILE RESPONSE
ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO SERVE DOCUMENTS ON ATTORNEY GENERAL
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
The Court has conducted a preliminary review of the Petition. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases and Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,*fn1 the Court HEREBY ORDERS:
1. Respondent SHALL SUBMIT a RESPONSIVE pleading by filing one of the following:
A. AN ANSWER addressing the merits of the Petition and due within NINETY (90) days of the date of service of this order. Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases; Cluchette v. Rushen, 770 F.2d 1469, 1473-1474 (9th Cir. 1985) (court has discretion to fix time for filing an Answer.).
S Respondent SHALL INCLUDE with the Answer any and all transcripts or other documents necessary for the resolution of the issues presented in the Petition. Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases.
S Any argument by Respondent that Petitioner has procedurally defaulted a claim(s) SHALL BE MADE in an ANSWER that also addresses the merits of the claims asserted. This is to enable the Court to determine whether Petitioner meets an exception to procedural default. See, Paradis v. Arave, 130 F.3d 385, 396 (9th Cir. 1997) (Procedurally defaulted claims may be reviewed on the merits to serve the ends of justice); Jones v. Delo, 56 F.3d 878 (8th Cir. 1995) (the answer to the question that it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror fairly considering all the evidence, including the new evidence, would have found Petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt necessarily requires a review of the merits).
S Petitioner's TRAVERSE, if any, is due THIRTY (30) days from the date Respondent's Answer is filed with the Court.
B. A MOTION TO DISMISS due within SIXTY(60) days of the date of service of this order based on the following grounds:*fn2
i. EXHAUSTION - 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). A Motion to Dismiss for Petitioner's failure to exhaust state court remedies SHALL INCLUDE copies of all the Petitioner's state court filings and dispositive rulings relevant to the examination of the statute limitations issue as required by Ford v. Hubbard, 330 F.3d 1086 (9th Cir. 2003) and Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2003);
ii. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS - 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). A Motion to Dismiss the Petition as filed beyond the one year limitations period SHALL INCLUDE copies of all Petitioner's state court filings and dispositive rulings.
iii. SECOND OR SUCCESSIVE Petitions - 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b). A Motion to Dismiss the Petition on the basis of § 2244(b) SHALL include a copy of the previously ...