Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2025

Simon v. Bonta

Judge
William Alsup
Docket
3:09-cv-05859
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Simon v. Uribe, Judge Alsup accepted the parties’ stipulation, found continuing jurisdiction, and kept the case schedule in place.

Who this affects

Mar-Nique Simon, his attorney Richard Tamor, and the respondent side represented by the California Attorney General’s Office; the order also concerns the requested substitution of Warden Jason Schultz for Warden Domingo Uribe.

What happened

In Mar-Nique Simon v. Domingo Uribe, the parties told the court that Simon’s lawyer decided to remain on the case and withdrew his request to stop representing Simon. They also asked the court to substitute Warden Jason Schultz for Warden Domingo Uribe because Simon was incarcerated at California State Prison, Sacramento.

The parties explained that Simon filed his federal challenge while serving a state-prison sentence, but was later released and discharged from parole. They agreed that the court still had authority to hear the case because the challenge could have continuing legal effects.

Judge William H. Alsup accepted the parties’ joint statement and stipulation, found that the court retained authority over the federal case, and directed the parties to continue following the existing schedule. This order did not decide the underlying challenge to Simon’s state judgment.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Simon v. Bonta · No. 3:09-cv-05859
Judge
William Alsup
Date
Nov. 18, 2025

Background

Mar-Nique Simon pleaded no contest in 2003 to attempted murder and second-degree robbery charges and admitted firearm and great-bodily-injury enhancements. The state court sentenced him to 20 years in prison in 2004. Simon filed this federal petition challenging that state judgment in December 2009, while he was serving the sentence.

Simon was released from prison in December 2019 and discharged from parole in December 2022. The parties stipulated that this release did not eliminate the court’s authority over the federal petition because the petition was filed while Simon was in custody and the state judgment could carry continuing legal consequences.

Counsel and Respondent

Simon’s lawyer, Richard Tamor, had filed a motion to withdraw. After a November 13, 2025 hearing and the court’s subsequent scheduling order, Tamor decided that it was proper for him to remain as Simon’s lawyer and retracted the withdrawal motion, which the parties considered moot.

The parties also requested that Warden Jason Schultz replace Warden Domingo Uribe as the respondent because Simon was then incarcerated at California State Prison, Sacramento. The opinion text shows the request as part of the parties’ stipulation.

Ruling

Judge William H. Alsup accepted the joint statement and stipulation and found that the court retained jurisdiction over the federal proceeding for the reasons stated by the parties. The court directed the parties to continue following the schedule in its November 13, 2025 order, specifically paragraphs 3, 4(a), 5(a), and 6.

This order addressed jurisdiction, counsel’s withdrawn motion, the requested respondent substitution, and case scheduling. It did not decide whether Simon’s underlying challenge to his state judgment succeeds.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.