period is not tolled, as petitioner contends, for the time period during which a properly filed application for post-conviction or other collateral review is pending in federal court.”); Vineze v. Hickman, No. Civ. S-98-044, 1999 WL 68330, at *1 (E.D.Cal. Jan. 13, 1999) (“[T]he court concludes that the statutory tolling provision set forth in Section 2244(d)(2) does not toll the period during the pendency of petitioner’s first federal habeas petition.”); Babcock v. Duncan, No. C97-2740, 1997 WL 724450, at *2 (N.D.Cal. Nov.12, 1997) (“No court has found that the running of the limitations period also is tolled ... for the time period during which a properly filed [habeas corpus petition] is pending in federal court.”); but see Barrett v. Yearwood, 63 F.Supp.2d 1245, 1250 (E.D.Cal.1999) (<HOLDING>). As the District Court explained in Sper-ling
holding that the plain meaning of  2244d2 is that the statute of limitations is tolled during the pendency of any properly filed federal habeas corpus petition holding that tolling of the statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of a claim dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution holding that the oneyear statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court seeking review of denial of state postconviction relief holding that the limitations period is not tolled while a federal habeas petition is pending holding that the limitations period is likewise not tolled during the pendency of a certiorari petition to the supreme court