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).

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?