Frausto v. Ndoh

District Court, S.D. California · 3:19-cv-00544 · 2025-07-02 · Unknown

Proceeding: original
Outcome: vacated — As Respondents have yet to file a responsive pleading, Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion to File a First Amended Petition is 28 VACATED as mo
Area: civil
Panel: Cynthia Ann Bashant (author)

Analysis

A model's reading — qwen3.8-27b, prompt own-v1, 2026-10-13T21:01Z · confidence high

The court considered a petitioner's motion for leave to file a First Amended Petition for a writ of habeas corpus and a pending stay of proceedings. The court vacated the motion as moot because the petitioner could amend as a matter of right under Rule 15(a), and lifted the stay sua sponte upon learning that the petitioner had exhausted state court remedies.

What the court decided	The model
Motion to File a First Amended Petition (ECF No. 18) is VACATED as moot. “Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion to File a First Amended Petition is VACATED as moot. (ECF No. 18.)”	agree with court The court correctly applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B), which allows a party to amend its pleading once as a matter of course before a responsive pleading is served. The order recites that respondents have not yet filed a responsive pleading. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to amend without leave of court, rendering the motion for leave unnecessary and moot. The court's reliance on Ninth Circuit precedent (Calderon and Keating) confirming that Rule 15 applies to habeas petitions supports this conclusion.
Stay of proceedings (ECF No. 9) is LIFTED. “the Court sua sponte LIFTS THE STAY of this proceeding (ECF No. 9).”	agree with court The court lifted the stay based on the fact that the petitioner had exhausted his claims in state court, as indicated by the reference to ECF No. 18-1. In habeas corpus proceedings, stays are often imposed to allow petitioners to exhaust state remedies. Once exhaustion is complete, the basis for the stay is removed, and the court has discretion to lift it to proceed with the federal case. The court's action is consistent with standard habeas procedure.

What the court decided

The model

Motion to File a First Amended Petition (ECF No. 18) is VACATED as moot.

“Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion to File a First Amended Petition is VACATED as moot. (ECF No. 18.)”

agree with court
The court correctly applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B), which allows a party to amend its pleading once as a matter of course before a responsive pleading is served. The order recites that respondents have not yet filed a responsive pleading. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to amend without leave of court, rendering the motion for leave unnecessary and moot. The court's reliance on Ninth Circuit precedent (Calderon and Keating) confirming that Rule 15 applies to habeas petitions supports this conclusion.

Stay of proceedings (ECF No. 9) is LIFTED.

“the Court sua sponte LIFTS THE STAY of this proceeding (ECF No. 9).”

agree with court
The court lifted the stay based on the fact that the petitioner had exhausted his claims in state court, as indicated by the reference to ECF No. 18-1. In habeas corpus proceedings, stays are often imposed to allow petitioners to exhaust state remedies. Once exhaustion is complete, the basis for the stay is removed, and the court has discretion to lift it to proceed with the federal case. The court's action is consistent with standard habeas procedure.

The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies that under Rule 15(a), a petitioner may amend as a matter of right before a responsive pleading is served, making the motion for leave moot. It also correctly lifts the stay upon the completion of state court exhaustion, which is the typical condition for such a stay in habeas cases. The reasoning is concise but sufficient for these procedural matters.

How this analysis was made · dispute it

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EDGAR LOPEZ FRAUSTO, Case No. 19-cv-0544-BAS-LR 12 Petitioner, ORDER 13 v. 1. VACATING APPLICATION TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED 14 JANAN CAVAGNOLO, ROB BONTA, PETITION (ECF No. 18) 15 Respondents. 2. LIFTING STAY (ECF No. 9), 16 17 Plaintiff applies to this Court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 18 (“Rule”) 15(c), for leave to file a First Amended Petition for write of habeas corpus by a 19 person in state custody. (ECF No. 18.) However, under Rule 15(a), a civil litigant may 20 “amend the party’s pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive 21 pleading is served.” Further, Rule 15 applies to habeas petitions “with the same force that 22 it applies to all garden-variety civil cases.” Calderon v. United States Dist. Ct., 134 F.3d 23 981, 986 n.6 (9th Cir. 1998) abrogated on other grounds by, Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 24 269 (2005)); see also Keating v. Hood, 191 F.3d 1053, 1067 (9th Cir. 1998) (applying Rule 25 15(a) to § 2254 habeas petitions). As Respondents have yet to file a responsive pleading, 26 Petitioner may file an amended pleading as a matter of right and does not need the Court’s 27 leave to do so. Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion to File a First Amended Petition is 28 VACATED as moot. (ECF No. 18.) 1 Finally, upon learning that Petitioner has exhausted his claims in state court (ECF 2 || No. 18-1 4 10), the Court sua sponte LIFTS THE STAY of this proceeding (ECF No. 9). 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 ||DATED: July 2, 2025 yatta Bahar 6 Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 4 United States District Court 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28