From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gutierrez-Perez v. Brewer

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 6, 2022
2:22-cv-0643 AC P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2022)

Opinion

2:22-cv-0643 AC P

10-06-2022

RAMON GUTIERREZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. DAVID BREWER, Respondent.


ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

ALLISON CLAIR, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. By order filed July 12, 2022, the undersigned screened the petition and found that petitioner's claims should have been brought, if at all, in an action for damages under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), or for injunctive relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. ECF No. 6. Petitioner was given thirty days to either voluntarily dismiss the action or convert the petition into a complaint for damages and/or injunctive relief and cautioned that failure to do one or the other would result in a recommendation that the petition be dismissed for lack of habeas jurisdiction. Id. After petitioner failed to respond to the order in any way, he was given an additional twenty-one days to voluntarily dismiss the action or convert the petition. ECF No. 7. He was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without further warning. Id. at 2. Twenty-one days have now passed, and petitioner has once again failed to respond to the order in any way. It will therefore be recommended that the petition be dismissed for lack of habeas jurisdiction for the reasons set forth in the July 12, 2022 order (ECF No. 6), which is incorporated herein by reference.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the petition be dismissed for lack of habeas jurisdiction for the reasons set forth in the July 12, 2022 Screening Order (ECF No. 6). See L.R. 110; Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).


Summaries of

Gutierrez-Perez v. Brewer

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 6, 2022
2:22-cv-0643 AC P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2022)
Case details for

Gutierrez-Perez v. Brewer

Case Details

Full title:RAMON GUTIERREZ-PEREZ, Petitioner, v. DAVID BREWER, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Oct 6, 2022

Citations

2:22-cv-0643 AC P (E.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2022)