Hall v. Warden Bureau of Prisons

Filing 10

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 9 Report and Recommendation. Case is transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 12/28/16. (ml)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
SHAREE HALL,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN [AND] BUREAU
OF PRISONS,
Respondents.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-16-1336-D

ORDER OF TRANSFER
Plaintiff, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, filed her Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Plaintiff challenged an October 2015
disciplinary hearing in which she was found guilty of misconduct and good
conduct credits were deducted from her sentence. The matter was referred to
Magistrate Judge Gary Purcell for initial proceedings consistent with 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(B).
On November 28, 2016, Judge Purcell filed his Report and Recommendation
(R&R) in which he recommended that Plaintiff’s action be transferred to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, her district of
confinement. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 447 (2004) (“[A] § 2241
habeas petitioner ... should name [her] warden as respondent and file the petition in
the district of confinement.”); Haugh v. Booker, 210 F.3d 1147, 1149 (10th Cir.

2000) (“A petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 attacks the execution of a sentence
rather than its validity and must be filed in the district where the prisoner is
confined.”).
In his Report and Recommendation, Judge Purcell advised Petitioner of her
right to file objections to the same and directed any objections to be filed no later
than December 19, 2016. Judge Purcell further admonished Petitioner that failure
to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to appellate review of the
factual and legal issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation. The
deadline for filing objections has expired and to date, Petitioner has neither filed an
objection nor sought an extension of time in which to do so. Accordingly, the
Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 9] is ADOPTED as though fully set forth
herein.
IT

IS

THEREFORE

ORDERED

that

Petitioner’s

action

is

TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania. The Court Clerk is hereby directed to transfer this matter forthwith.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of December, 2016.

2