Dao v. Robertson

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 CUONG HUY DAO, Case No. 19-cv-01074-WHO (PR) Petitioner, ORDER STAYING ACTION v. 14 J. ROBERTSON, Respondent.

17 Petitioner Cuong Huy Dao’s “Request for Postponement and Withdrawal of Federal Habeas Corpus” is construed as a motion to stay habeas proceedings so that Dao can exhaust claims in state court. (Dkt. No. 23.) So construed, the motion is GRANTED.

20 This federal habeas action is STAYED under Rhines v. Webber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005).

21 Nothing further will take place in this suit until the Court decides further action is appropriate, or until Dao meets the conditions for dissolving the stay.

23 Dao is required to file a petition containing his unexhausted claims in the California Supreme Court within 90 days from the date of this order. Within 30 days after obtaining a decision from the state supreme court on his unexhausted claims, Dao must file in this Court a motion to dissolve the stay and to reopen federal habeas proceedings.

27 Any motion to reopen must contain an amended petition on this Court’s form.

1 (19-01074 WHO (PR)) and the words FIRST AMENDED PETITION on the first page.

2 || Because an amended petition completely replaces the previous petitions, Dao must include || in his first amended petition all the claims he wishes to present. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, || 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992). He may not incorporate material from a prior || petition by reference.

6 The Clerk shall ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE the file pending the stay of this || action.

8 IT IS SO ORDERED. .

9 || Dated: July 9, 2020 \ 002 10 Tau ADDI ILLIAM H. ORRICK 11 United States District Judge qa 12

©

Z 18