Dominguez

MEMORANDUM **

Roberto Dominquez appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his Nevada convictions for conspiracy to commit robbery, attempted robbery with the use of a deadly weapon, and attempted murder with the use of a deadly weapon. The district court dismissed the petition as barred by the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , review the dismissal de novo, Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), and affirm.

Dominquez argues that his present habeas petition was timely filed because the district court failed to advise Dominquez before dismissing the first habeas petition that (1) he could request a stay and abeyance and (2) the statute of limitations would bar all claims if he chose to dismiss the first habeas petition because the limitations period had expired while the first federal petition was pending. These arguments are foreclosed by Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225 , 124 S.Ct. 2441 , 159 L.Ed.2d 338 (2004). The district court was not required to calculate the statute of limitations to resolve the mixed petition, to advise Dominquez that he could stay the case, or to advise…