Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00175/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00175-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Tim Virga
Respondent
Curtis Lee Washington
Petitioner

Document Text:

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding in propria persona with a petition for writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

The instant petition was filed on January 30, 2013. (Doc. 1). On April 4, 2013, Respondent 

filed an Answer. (Doc. 13). On May 23, 2013, Petitioner filed his Traverse along with the instant 

motion to file a Traverse in excess of the permitted page limit. (Docs. 19 & 20). On June 14, 2013, 

Petitioner filed the instant motion to stay proceedings in this case while he exhausts additional claims 

in state court regarding ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. (Doc. 21). Respondent 

had not filed an opposition to the motion to stay proceedings. On September 20, 2013, the Court 

granted Petitioner’s motion for stay of proceedings. (Doc. 22). On September 23, 2013, Petitioner 

CURTIS LEE WASHINGTON,

 Petitioner,

v.

TIM VIRGA, Warden,

Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:13-cv-00175-LJO-JLT

ORDER GRANTINGPETITIONER’S MOTION TO 

AMEND PETITION (Doc. 23)

ORDER LIFTING STAY OF PROCEEDINGS 

(Doc. 21) 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 

FILE LODGED AMENDED PETITION (Doc. 24) 

ORDER REQUIRING RESPONDENT TO FILE 

SUPPLEMENTAL ANSWER WITHIN SIXTY 

DAYS

Case 1:13-cv-00175-DAD-JLT Document 26 Filed 10/11/13 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

filed the instant motion to amend the petition with his newly exhausted claims; Petitioner also lodged 

with the Court his proposed first amended petition. (Docs. 23 & 24). In a status report filed on 

October 2, 2013, Petitioner indicated that on September 11, 2013, he had now fully exhausted the 

issues he wished to include in the first amended petition. (Doc. 25). 

DISCUSSION

Petitioner may amend a petition for writ of habeas corpus once “as a matter of course,” and 

without leave of Court, before a response has been filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), 

as applied to habeas corpus actions pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2242 and Rule 11 of the Rules Governing 

Section 2254 Cases. Calderon v. United States District Court (Thomas), 144 F.3d 618, 620 (9th Cir. 

1998); Bonn v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9th Cir. 1995). Leave of Court is required for all other 

amendments. Rule Civ. P. 15(a). Here, Respondent had already filed a response. Thus, leave of 

Court is required for any amendment to the petition.

In deciding whether to allow an amendment, the Court may consider “bad faith, undue delay, 

prejudice to the opposing party, futility of the amendment, and whether the party has previously 

amended his pleadings.” Bonin v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 844-45 (9th Cir.1995) (applying Rule 15(a) 

in a habeas case). In its previous order, the Court considered all of the above factors except for futility 

in deciding Petitioner’s motion for stay of proceedings. The Court defers any final determination on 

futility until after Respondent files a supplemental response to the newly amended claims. Put 

another way, by granting the amendment, the Court expresses no view on whether the proposed 

amendments may be barred by procedural default, the statute of limitations, or some other principle of 

federal habeas law not presently obvious from the record now before the Court.

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Petitioner’s motion to file an amended petition (Doc. 23), is GRANTED;

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file the lodged first amended petition 

(Doc. 24); 

3. The stay of proceedings issued on September 20, 2013 (Doc. 22), is LIFTED;

Case 1:13-cv-00175-DAD-JLT Document 26 Filed 10/11/13 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. Respondent is permitted to file a supplemental Answer regarding issues raised in the 

first amended petition (Doc. 24), within sixty days of the date of service of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 10, 2013 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00175-DAD-JLT Document 26 Filed 10/11/13 Page 3 of 3