T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J E S US L UA , P e titio n e r- A p p e lla n t, v. M I C H A E L M A R T E L , W a r de n, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 16783 D . C. N o . 2 : 0 8 - c v - 0 0 2 1 3 - W BSJ FM ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia W i l l i a m B . S hubb, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry8, 2010 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: O ’ S C A N N L A IN , T R O T T an d P A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J e s us L uaappe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s di s m i s s a l of hi s 28 U . S . C . § 2254 habe a s pe t i t i on a s unt i m e l y . L uaa r gue s the c ourts houl d t ol l the s t a tut e of l i m i t at i on fr om Janu ary 12 t o Jun e 8, 20 06 -- the peri od of t i m e betw ee n the deni al 

# FI LED FEB 19 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

of L ua ’ s thi r d s t a t e habe a s pe t i t i on a nd the f i l i ng of hi s f ourth. W e r e vi e w de n o v o , Sp i t s y n v . M o o r e , 3 4 5 F. 3 d 7 9 6 , 7 9 9 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 3 ) , a n d w e a f f i rm. T he one - y e a rs t a tut e of

l i m i t a t i on c ont a i ne d i n the A nt i t e rr or i s m a nd E f f e c tiv e D e a th P e n a ltyA c t ( “A E D P A ” ) is s u b je c t to b o th s ta tu to rya n d e q u itab le t ol l i ng. H abe a s pe t i t i one r s a r e e nt i t l e d t o s t a tut oryt ol l i ng of the t i m e “ dur i ng w hi ch a properl y f

i l ed appl i ca t i on for S t at e post -c on vi ct i on or other c ol l at er al r e v ie w w ith r e s p e c t to th e p e rtin e n t ju d g m e n t o rc la im is p e n d in g .” 2 8 U .S .C . § 22 44 (d)( 2). T hi s s ec t i on al so al l ow s f or i nt erval t ol l i ng betw ee n st at e habeas pe t i t i ons , butonl y i f

the ne xtpe t i t i on i s t i m e l yunde rs t a t e l a w . C a r e yv. S a f f ol d, 5 3 6 U .S . 2 1 4 , 2 2 5 ( 2 0 0 2 ) . U nde rC a l i f

orni al a w , L uaw a s r e qui r e d t o f i l e hi s f ourth pe t i t i on w i thi n a r e a s o n ab le tim e o f

th e d e n ia l o f

h is th ir d . H e d id n o t. I n s te a d , h e w a ite d n e a r ly f i ve m onths t o f

i l e hi s f ourth pe t i t i on, m a ki ng tha tpe t i t i on unt i m e l y . S e e E va ns v. C havi s, 54 6 U . S . 18 9, 20 1 (20 06 ) ( ho l di ng thatdel ayof si x m on ths w as unr e a s onabl e unde rC a l i f orni al a w ) ; C ha f

f e rv. P r os pe r , ___ F . 3d ___, 2010 W L 157488, *1 ( 9th C i r . J a n. 19, 2010) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( hol di ng tha tgaps of 115 da y s a nd 1 0 0 d a y s r e n d e r e dC a lif o rn ias ta te h ab e a s p e titio n s u n tim e ly ) . T h e r e f o r e , L u ais n o t e n title d to s ta tu to ry to llin g o f th e r e le v a n t tim e p e r io d u n d e r§ 2 2 4 4 ( d ) ( 2 ) .3

N e ith e ris L u ae n title d to e q u itab le to llin g . E q u itab le to llin g “is u n a v a ilab le i n m ostca se s, ” and “ the thres ho l d n ec es saryt o tri gg erequi t abl e t ol l i ng un der A E D P A i s ve ry hi gh, l e s tthe e xc e pt i ons s w a l l ow the rul e . ” M i r a ndav. C a s tr o, 29 2 F . 3d 10 63 , 10 66 (9th C i r. 20 02 ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on s om i tt ed). A habeas pet i t i on eri s e nt i t l ed t o equ i t abl e t ol l i ng on l y i f he s ho w s “ ‘ (1) thathe has been pur s ui ng hi s r i ght s di l i ge nt l y , a nd ( 2) tha ts om e e xtr a or di na ryc i r c um s t a nc e s t ood i n hi s w a y ’ a nd pr e ve nt e d at i m e l yf i l i ng. ” L a w r e nc e v. F l or i da , 549 U . S . 327, 336 ( 2 0 0 7 ) ( q u o tin g P a c e v . D iG u g lie lm o , 5 4 4 U .S . 4 0 8 , 4 1 8 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ) . C on traryt o L ua’ s a ss ert i on s, the l aw w as cl ear a s e ar l y a s 200 2 thatan u n tim e lys ta te p e titio n w o u ld p r e c lu d e s ta tu to ryto llin g . C ar e y , 5 3 6 U .S . a t 2 2 5 . B e c aus e L uadi d notr e l y t o hi s de tr i m e nton pr e c e de nttha tw a s l a t e rove rrul e d, H arri s v . C art er, 5 1 5 F . 3 d 1 0 5 1 , 1 0 5 7 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 8 ), d o es n o tap p l y. T he pri son’ s a l l eged pract i ce of re stri ct i ng ac ce ss t o the l aw l i brary a l so do es notw a rr a nte qui t abl e t ol l i ng. L uadoe s nota l l e ge he w a s e ve rde ni e d a c c e s s t o the l i brary, and i n fac tac kn ow l edges thathe had such acce ss for one si x-ho ur day per w e e k . M o r e o v e r , L u ah a s n o t s h o w n th a t h e a c te d d ilig e n tly- - h e h a s “f a il[ e d ] to m a ke a ny s pe c i f

i c a l l e ga t i on” i ndi c a t i ng “ w ha the di d t o pur s ue hi s c l a i m s a nd c om pl a i n about ” the a l l e ge d a c c e s s pr obl e m . C ha f f e r , 2010 W L 157488 a t*2 (i nt ernal qu ot at i on om i tt ed).4

F i na l l y , the f

a c ttha tL uaw a s pr oc e e di ng pr o s e , w i thoutm or e , i s note nough t o s upportthe appl i c a t i on of e qui t abl e t ol l i ng. R oyv. L a m pe rt , 465 F . 3d 964, 970 (9th C i r. 20 06 ). T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y di sm i ss ed L ua’ s § 22 54 pet i t i on as u n t i m el y. AF F I R ME D.