Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-07780/USCOURTS-cand-4_19-cv-07780-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Frederick Renee Gates
Petitioner
Robert Neuschnid
Respondent

Document Text:

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EUREKA DIVISION

FREDERICK RENEE GATES,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT NEUSCHNID,

Defendant.

Case No. 19-cv-07780-RMI 

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner was convicted in San Mateo County, which is in this district, so

venue is proper here. See 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). Petitioner paid the filing fee and consented to the 

jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge (see dkts. 1, 2). 

The court received two petitions. The first (dkt. 1) was sent from outside of prison, and the 

second (dkt. 3) was sent from the prison where petitioner is incarcerated. While the petitions

contain overlapping claims, there are several differences.

1 Out of an abundance of caution, the 

petitions are dismissed with leave to amend. Petitioner should file an amended petition which sets 

forth each claim on which he wishes to proceed, and which describes the specifics of each claim. 

Petitioner is reminded that the court can only review claims and sub-claims that have been fully 

exhausted in state court. 

1 For example, the first petition contains an as-applied and a facial challenge to a California law. 

First Pet. (dkt. 1) at 5. However, the second petition only contains a facial challenge to the law. 

See Second Pet. (dkt. 3) at 5. It is not clear what claim or claims have been exhausted. In addition, 

the habeas form in the first petition contains four claims. See First Pet. (dkt. 1) at 5. However, the 

habeas form in the second petition only contains three claims. See Second Pet. (dkt. 3) at 5. 

Case 4:19-cv-07780-PJH Document 6 Filed 02/05/20 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

For the foregoing reasons, the petitions are DISMISSED with leave to amend. The 

amended petition must be filed within twenty-eight days of service of this order, and carry the 

words AMENDED PETITION on the first page. Failure to amend within the designated time will 

result in the dismissal of the action.

Petitioner must keep the court informed of any change of address and must comply with 

the court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for 

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Martinez v. Johnson, 

104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2020

ROBERT M. ILLMAN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:19-cv-07780-PJH Document 6 Filed 02/05/20 Page 2 of 2