California state prisoner, Hector Hernandez, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, see Delhomme v. Ramirez, 340 F.3d 817, 819 (9th Cir.2003) (per curiam), and we vacate and remand. Hernandez is entitled to statutory tolling during the entire time he was seeking one full round of collateral review by the California courts. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d); Biggs v. Duncan, 339 F.3d 1045, 1048 (9th Cir.2003). Because Hernandez’s October 28, 2001, state habeas petition was an overlapping petition that began a separate round of review, it did not affect tolling during his second full round of review. See Delhomme, 340 F.3d at 819-21 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, Hernandez’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254
holding that overlapping state habeas petitions begin a separate round of review and do not disturb the pendency of petitioners first round of review holding petitioner cannot circumvent time requirements for seeking certiorari review of an order denying a motion for a protective order by filing a successive motion seeking the same relief and seeking certiorari review that is timely only with respect to the order denying the second motion recognizing that a habeas petitioner may be entitled to tolling during a second round of petitions but holding that the statute is not tolled between rounds holding that overlapping petitions do not affect tolling during the time petitioner is seeking one full round of review holding that equitable tolling is available for petitions filed pursuant to 28 usc  2255