Eden v. Cozza-Rhodes

Filing 14

ORDER to File Preliminary Response, by Magistrate Judge Gordon P. Gallagher on 1/27/15. (morti, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 14-cv-03014-GPG CASEY D. EDEN, Applicant, v. T. COZZA-RHODES, Respondent. ORDER TO FILE PRELIMINARY RESPONSE Applicant Casey D. Eden currently is detained at the Sedgwick County Detention Facility in Wichita, Kansas. Applicant initiated this action by filing pro se an Application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, while he was incarcerated at the United States Penitentiary in Florence, Colorado. He has been granted leave to proceed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. As part of the preliminary consideration of the Application in this case and pursuant to Keck v. Hartley, 550 F. Supp. 2d 1272 (D. Colo. 2008), the Court has determined that a limited Preliminary Response is appropriate. Respondent is directed pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts to file a Preliminary Response limited to addressing the affirmative defense of exhaustion of administrative remedies with respect to the execution of his sentence. If Respondent does not intend to raise this affirmative defense, Respondent must notify the Court of that decision in the Preliminary Response. Respondent may not file a dispositive motion as a Preliminary Response, or an Answer, or otherwise address the merits of the claims in response to this Order. In support of the Preliminary Response, Respondent should attach as exhibits all relevant portions of the administrative record, including but not limited to copies of all documents demonstrating whether Applicant has exhausted administrative remedies. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that within twenty-one days from the date of this Order Respondent shall file a Preliminary Response that complies with this Order. It is FURTHER ORDERED that within twenty-one days of the filing of the Preliminary Response Applicant may file a Reply, if he desires. It is FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondent does not intend to raise the affirmative defense of exhaustion of administrative remedies, Respondent must notify the Court of that decision in the Preliminary Response. Dated: January 27, 2015 BY THE COURT: s/Gordon P. Gallagher United States Magistrate Judge 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?