Webb v. Oddo
ORDER - It is hereby ORDERED that the motions 4 , 9 , 21 , 23 & 24 are DISMISSED. (See order for complete details.) Signed by Chief Judge Christopher C. Conner on 7/25/17. (ki)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
KEITH BRYAN WEBB-EL,
L.J. ODDO, WARDEN,
CIVIL NO. 1:17-CV-321
(Chief Judge Conner)
AND NOW, this 25th day of July, 2017, upon consideration of petitioner’s
motion (Doc. 4) for the court to “exercise its title 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3) . . .
jurisdiction”, motions (Docs. 9, 21, 23) for summary judgment, and motion (Doc. 24)
for judgment on the pleadings, and the court finding that petitioner’s motions are
inappropriate and unnecessary in a habeas proceeding, because, under the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, the procedure the court should follow when entertaining
an application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 begins with the
issuance of a service order, followed by the filing of a response by the person having
custody of the petitioner, the filing of a reply by the petitioner, then a hearing, if
deemed necessary by the court, and a decision, see 28 U.S.C. § 2243; see e.g., Cool v.
Pennsylvania, 2008 WL 2858310 (M.D. Pa. 2008) (finding that a motion for summary
judgment is inappropriate in a section 2254 habeas action); Ghaziaskar v. Ashcroft,
2005 WL 1138377 (M.D. Pa. 2005) (construing petitioner’s motions for judgment as a
matter of law as motions for default judgment, and denying the motions as
unauthorized by the statutory provisions and rules related to habeas corpus
proceedings); Atkins v. United States, 1990 WL 126196, *3 (“the habeas corpus
statute seems to treat the petition itself as the equivalent of a petitioner-initiated
summary judgment motion”) (citing 1 J. Liebman, Federal Habeas Corpus Practice
and Procedure § 17.3 (1988)), it is hereby ORDERED that the motions (Docs. 4, 9, 21,
23, 24) are DISMISSED.
/S/ CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER
Christopher C. Conner, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Middle District of Pennsylvania
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?