Ubaldo Mio Gutierrez v. Rick M. Hill
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why the Petition Should Not Be Dismissed as Second or Successive by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick: Petitioner is ORDERED to show cause in writing within twenty-eight (28) days why the Petition should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (see document for details.) (es)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
2009). Petitioner’s second federal habeas petition was dismissed as second or successive. See
Gutierrez v. Gipson, No. 12-8468, 2012 WL 6013227 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2012).
Before acting on its own initiative to summarily dismiss the Petition, the Court will afford
Petitioner an opportunity to present his position on this dispositive issue. See Day v. McDonough,
547 U.S. 198, 210 (2006). Accordingly, Petitioner is ORDERED to show cause in writing
within twenty-eight (28) days why the Petition should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
See Cooper v. Calderon, 274 F.3d 1270, 1274 (9th Cir. 2001) (“When the AEDPA is in play, the
district court may not, in the absence of proper authorization from the court of appeals, consider a
second or successive habeas application.”) (citation omitted). Petitioner is expressly warned that
failure to respond will likely result in dismissal.
Initials of Deputy Clerk: nb
Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?