Dao v. Robertson
- William Orrick
- 3:19-cv-01074
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Dao v. Robertson, Judge Orrick stayed the federal habeas case again pending a state supreme court decision on unexhausted claims.
Cuong Huy Dao, whose federal habeas action is paused while he seeks a state supreme court decision on unexhausted claims; J. Robertson is the respondent.
What happened
In Dao v. Robertson, the court stayed Cuong Huy Dao’s federal habeas case again while he seeks a decision from the state supreme court on claims the court described as unexhausted.
The case will not proceed until the court lifts the stay. Within 30 days after receiving the state supreme court’s decision, Dao must ask to dissolve the stay and reopen the federal case, submitting a complete first amended petition.
Judge William H. Orrick also ordered the Clerk to terminate all pending motions and administratively close the file while the stay remains in place.
The detailed version
- Dao v. Robertson · No. 3:19-cv-01074
- William Orrick
- Nov. 29, 2021
Background
This federal habeas action concerns petitioner Cuong Huy Dao and respondent J. Robertson. In light of Dao’s motion at Docket No. 27, the court ordered that the action be stayed again under the procedure described in Rhines v. Webber. A stay pauses the case; it does not resolve the claims.
Order
Nothing further will take place until the court lifts the stay. Within 30 days after obtaining a decision from the state supreme court on his unexhausted claims, Dao must file a motion to dissolve the stay and reopen the federal habeas proceedings.
Any motion to reopen must include an amended petition on the court’s form. The amended petition must use the caption and civil case number in the order and include the words “FIRST AMENDED PETITION” on its first page. Because an amended petition completely replaces earlier petitions, Dao must include all claims he wishes to present and may not incorporate material from an earlier petition by reference.
Disposition
Judge William H. Orrick ordered the action stayed again. The Clerk was directed to terminate all pending motions and administratively close the file while the action remains stayed. The order did not decide the merits of Dao’s habeas claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.