From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frank v. Warden, USP Atwater

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 31, 2021
1:21-cv-00568-HBK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2021)

Opinion

1:21-cv-00568-HBK

08-31-2021

JIMMY LEE FRANK, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, USP ATWATER, Respondent.


ORDER STRIKING LETTER FROM THE RECORD

(DOC. NO. 29)

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner Jimmy Lee Frank, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has pending a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. No. 1). Before the Court is Petitioner's “Motion Asking for a Fair Ruling.” (Doc. No. 29). Although Petitioner fashions his filing as a motion, Petitioner addresses his filing to “Judge Mrs. Helena Barch-Kuchta” and generally requests the Court “to take sympathy” on him and rule in his favor, asking for a “second chance at freedom” so that he may spend time with his children. (Id. at 1). The Court construes the pleading not as a motion but as an improper ex parte letter addressed to the Court. “No petition or motion shall be addressed to an individual Judge or Magistrate Judge.” Local Rule 190(c). Further, Petitioner has failed to serve a copy of this filing on Respondent, in violation of Local Rule 135(d), which states that “[u]nless a party expressly waives service, copies of all documents submitted to the Court shall be served upon all parties to the action.”

Accordingly, the Clerk of Court shall STRIKE from the docket the improperly filed letter (Doc. No. 29) and terminate it as a pending motion.


Summaries of

Frank v. Warden, USP Atwater

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Aug 31, 2021
1:21-cv-00568-HBK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2021)
Case details for

Frank v. Warden, USP Atwater

Case Details

Full title:JIMMY LEE FRANK, Petitioner, v. WARDEN, USP ATWATER, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Aug 31, 2021

Citations

1:21-cv-00568-HBK (E.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2021)