Young v. Biter

Filing 40

ORDER REOPENING CASE; ORDER DISMISSING PETITION WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/15/16. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/15/2016) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/15/2016: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (cl, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HOWARD YOUNG,

United States District Court
Northern District of California

Petitioner,

Case No. 15-cv-03970-RS (PR)

12

v.

ORDER REOPENING ACTION;

13
14

C. PFEIFFER,
Respondent.

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

15
16
17

This federal habeas action was dismissed because petitioner filed an amended

18

petition that failed to answer crucial questions, e.g., the name and location of the court of

19

conviction. Petitioner since has filed another amended petition. The action is

20

REOPENED, and the Clerk shall amend the docket to reflect this. The judgment (Docket

21

No. 36) and the order of dismissal (Docket No. 35) are VACATED.

22

The present petition is deficient. Like his prior ones, his amended petition fails to

23

answer important questions. In particular, petitioner fails to state what crimes he was

24

convicted of, and the exact date(s) of conviction and sentencing. Petitioner is reminded of

25

the following, which appeared in a prior order of dismissal: “A proper habeas application

26

must be filled out completely and the questions posed by the form must be answered in

27

full.” A petition failing to comply fully with these instructions will be dismissed.

28

1

Accordingly, the petition is DISMISSED with leave to file an amended petition on

2

or before November 1, 2016. No extensions of time will be granted. The amended

3

petition must include the caption and civil case number used in this order (15-03970 RS

4

(PR)) and the words FOURTH AMENDED PETITION on the first page. Because an

5

amended petition completely replaces the previous petition, petitioner must include in his

6

amended petition all the claims he wishes to present. He may not incorporate material

7

from the prior petition by reference. Failure to file an amended petition in accordance with

8

this order will result in dismissal of this action with prejudice for failure to prosecute under

9

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

10

Petitioner’s motion for discovery and to renew his prior motions (Docket No. 39) is

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

DENIED. The Court will not consider any such motion until petitioner has filed a proper

12

petition. The Clerk shall terminate Docket No. 39.

13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

15
Dated: September ___, 2016

_________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
CASE NO. 15-cv-03970-RS

28
2