Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 9, 2026

Reed v. Smith

Judge
Donna Ryu
Docket
5:24-cv-09063
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
HabeasCivil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

John Reed v. Smith: Judge Wise dismissed Reed’s habeas case without prejudice after he missed the amendment deadline.

Who this affects

John Reed’s case was dismissed without prejudice after he did not file an amended petition; Smith was the respondent.

What happened

In John Reed v. Smith, the court had previously granted Smith’s motion to dismiss Reed’s petition and gave Reed 28 days to file an amended petition. Reed did not file one by the deadline.

The court dismissed the case without prejudice. It also stated that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, although Reed may seek one from the Ninth Circuit. To reopen the case, Reed must file a motion to reopen and an amended petition addressing the issues identified in the January 20, 2026 order.

Judge Noél Wise signed the March 9, 2026 order, and the Clerk was directed to close the file.

The detailed version

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

Case
Reed v. Smith · No. 5:24-cv-09063
Judge
Donna Ryu
Date
Mar. 9, 2026

Background

On January 20, 2026, the court granted Respondent Smith’s motion to dismiss Petitioner John Reed’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus, meaning a petition asking a federal court to review the lawfulness of a person’s custody. The court gave Reed 28 days to amend his petition and warned that the case could be dismissed if he did not do so.

Ruling

The amendment deadline passed, and Reed did not file an amended petition. The court therefore dismissed the matter without prejudice. This means the dismissal did not bar the court from considering a properly supported request to reopen the case. The court stated that Reed must file a motion to reopen and an amended petition addressing the issues identified in the January 20 order.

The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because Reed had not shown that reasonable judges could debate whether his petition stated a valid claim that his constitutional rights were denied. The order stated that Reed may seek a certificate of appealability from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clerk was directed to close the file.

Effect

The order ended the case at the district-court level based on Reed’s failure to amend after receiving permission and a deadline to do so. It did not decide the underlying habeas claims in this order. Judge Noél Wise signed the order on March 9, 2026.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.