Nickell v. FCI Dublin Bureau of Prisons

Filing 10

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Respondent's Answer or Motion to Dismiss due by 5/28/2024. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 3/26/2024. (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/26/2024) Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 STELLA MAUDINE NICKELL, Petitioner, United States District Court Northern District of California 11 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 12 13 Case No. 23-cv-06059-YGR (PR) NANCY T. McKINNEY, Interim Warden,1 Respondent. 14 15 Petitioner, a federal prisoner incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution in Dublin, 16 California2 has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.3 Dkt. 1. 17 Petitioner has paid the filing fee. Dkt. 5. 18 19 20 It does not appear from the face of the petition that it is without merit. Good cause appearing, the Court hereby issues the following orders: 1. The Clerk of the Court shall serve electronically a copy of this order upon the 21 respondent and respondent’s attorney, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of 22 California, at the following email addresses: (1); 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Nancy T. McKinney, the current interim warden of the prison where petitioner is incarcerated, has been substituted as respondent pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 2 The Court is aware of the circumstances at FCI Dublin and the satellite camp and has ordered the installation of a special master. 3 As petitioner is incarcerated within the Northern District of California and her petition challenges the execution of her federal sentence, venue is proper in this district. See Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 249-50 (9th Cir. 1989). 1 (2); and (3) The petition and the exhibits thereto 2 are available via the Electronic Case Filing System for the Northern District of California. The 3 Clerk shall serve by mail a copy of this order on petitioner. 4 Respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner, within sixty (60) days 5 of the date this Order is filed, an answer to this petition, showing cause why a writ of habeas 6 corpus should not be granted based on petitioner’s cognizable claims. Respondent shall file with 7 the answer and serve on petitioner a copy of all exhibits that are relevant to a determination of the 8 issues presented by the petition. 9 United States District Court Northern District of California 2. 3. If petitioner wishes to respond to the Answer, petitioner shall do so by filing a 10 Traverse with the Court and serving it on respondent within twenty-eight (28) days of petitioner’s 11 receipt of the Answer. Should petitioner fail to do so, the petition will be deemed submitted and 12 ready for decision twenty-eight (28) days after the date petitioner is served with respondent’s 13 Answer. 14 4. Respondent may file with this Court and serve upon petitioner, within sixty (60) 15 days of the issuance of this Order, a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of an 16 Answer, as set forth in the Advisory Committee Notes to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 17 2254 Cases. If respondent files a motion to dismiss, petitioner shall file with the Court and serve 18 on respondent an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motion within twenty-eight 19 (28) days of receipt of the motion, and respondent shall file with the Court and serve on petitioner 20 a reply within fourteen (14) days of receipt of any opposition. 21 5. It is petitioner’s responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner must keep the 22 Court and respondent informed of any change of address and must comply with the Court’s orders 23 in a timely fashion. Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 3-11 a party proceeding pro se 24 whose address changes while an action is pending must promptly file a notice of change of 25 address specifying the new address. See L.R. 3-11(a). The Court may dismiss a pro se action 26 without prejudice when: (1) mail directed to the pro se party by the Court has been returned to the 27 Court as not deliverable, and (2) the Court fails to receive within sixty days of this return a written 28 communication from the pro se party indicating a current address. See L.R. 3-11(b); see also 2 1 Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (Rule 41(b) applicable in habeas cases). 2 Petitioner must also serve on respondent’s counsel all communications with the Court by mailing 3 a true copy of the document to respondent’s counsel. 4 5 6 7 6. Upon a showing of good cause, requests for a reasonable extension of time will be granted provided they are filed on or before the deadline they seek to extend. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 26, 2024 8 9 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS United States District Judge 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?