
    George PARDO, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Matthew CATE, Secretary, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 10-56039.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Argued and Submitted March 4, 2013.
    Filed March 7, 2013.
    Allen Bloom, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Matthew Mulford, Kevin Vienna, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: HAWKINS, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
   MEMORANDUM

George Pardo appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his mixed habeas petition, after the court denied Pardo’s motion to stay the petition and hold federal proceedings in abeyance while he exhausted his claims in state court.

After the filing of this appeal, the California Supreme Court denied Pardo’s state habeas petition, and Pardo then filed a second federal habeas petition raising the previously unexhausted claims. The record indicates that the district court has denied, without prejudice, the Warden’s motion to dismiss the second petition as untimely filed.

Resolution of the issues pending in the second habeas petition may make some aspects of this appeal moot, and staying this appeal pending resolution of the second habeas petition would unnecessarily fragment the case. Therefore, in the interest of judicial economy, and in order to ensure consolidated and orderly processing and consideration of all the issues, we vacate the judgment and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings as it deems appropriate, including case consolidation.

Given this resolution, we need not — and do not — reach any issue urged by the parties on appeal.

VACATED AND REMANDED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     