Moreno

MEMORANDUM **

Leonard Ruben Moreno (“Moreno”) appeals the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition for untimeliness pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d). 1 The district court had jurisdiction over Moreno’s petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we now affirm.

We review the district court’s dismissal of a habeas petition on timeliness grounds de novo. See Guillory v. Roe, 329 F.3d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.2003). We also review the issue of equitable tolling de novo, where, as here, the facts are undisputed. See Corjasso v. Ayers, 278 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir.2002).

1. Equitable Tolling

The AEDPA’s limitations period may be tolled “ ‘only if extraordinary circumstances beyond a prisoner’s control make it impossible to file a petition on time.’” Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1107 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting Calderon v. U.S. Dist. Court (Kelly), 163 F.3d 530, 541 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc)). “Although equitable tolling is unavailable in most cases,” it may be appropriate “[w]hen external *608 forces, rather than a petitioner’s lack of diligence, account for the failure to file a timely claim.” Id. at 1107; see, e.g., Guillory, 329 F.3d at…