UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
September 17, 2012
ISRAEL PULIDO, PETITIONER,
G.J. JANDA, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John A. Kronstadt United States District Judge
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the petition, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Further, the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.
The Magistrate Judge recommended that the petition be dismissed based on expiration of the statute of limitations. The petition was filed almost seven years late. (Report at 4.) In his response to the Magistrate Judge's order to show cause, Petitioner did not argue he was entitled to equitable tolling. (Id.) In his objections, Petitioner states he "does not speak, understand english. Has a 6th grade education. No person with a Legal sense wanted to help."*fn1 Petitioner presents no evidence that his supposed inability to speak and understand English, or his level of education, made it impossible for him to file a habeas petition for almost a 7-year period. See Mendoza v. Carey, 449 F.3d 1065, 1070 (9th Cir. 2006) ("[W]e conclude that a non-English-speaking petitioner seeking equitable tolling must, at a minimum, demonstrate that during the running of the AEDPA time limitation, he was unable, despite diligent efforts, to procure either legal materials in his own language or translation assistance from an inmate, library personnel, or other source."); Aparicio v. McDaniel, 2012 WL 1079055, *8 (D. Nev. 2012) ("A limited education level, standing alone, is not an extraordinary circumstance that stands in the way of and prevents a timely filing."); Jones v. Busby, 2010 WL 2742213, *4 (C.D. Cal. 2010) (collecting cases).*fn2
Petitioner's remaining objections have no merit.
IT IS ORDERED that judgment be entered denying the petition and dismissing this action with prejudice.