Basra v. RJC Jail et al

Filing 3

ORDER Substituting Respondent and DIRECTING SERVICE and Answer to 2254 Petition; Copy of order and petition sent by Certified Mail on 2/8/2018 to Stephen Sinclair and Attorney General for the State of Washington, by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. (Attachments: # 1 Pro Se Instruction Sheet)(Stephen Sinclair added. Clallam Bay Corrections and RJC Jail terminated.)**6 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Paramjit Basra, Prisoner ID: )(SWT)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 PARAMJIT SINGH BASRA, 8 ORDER SUBSTITUTING RESPONDENT AND DIRECTING SERVICE AND ANSWER TO § 2254 PETITION v. 10 STEPHEN SINCLAIR, 11 Respondent. 12 13 14 CASE NO. C18-186 TSZ-BAT Petitioner, 9 The Court has reviewed the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in this case and ORDERS: 15 RESPONDENT 16 (1) Stephen Sinclair, Secretary of the Washington State Department of Corrections, 17 is substituted as the sole respondent in this matter. 1 See Rules Governing Section 2254 18 Proceedings, 1976 advisory committee’s note to Rule 2(a); see also Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 19 F.3d 891, 894–96 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding that the Director of Corrections of California is also 20 proper respondent because he has power to produce a California prisoner). 21 1 22 23 When petitioner filed his pro se habeas petition, he named as respondents the King County Regional Justice Center and Clallam Bay Corrections because he was temporarily transferred to King County RJC from his regular place of incarceration at Clallam Bay. Dkt. 1. On docketing the habeas petition, however, the Clerk of Court noted that petitioner had since been transferred to Washington Corrections Center. Dkt. 1-2. ORDER SUBSTITUTING RESPONDENT AND DIRECTING SERVICE AND ANSWER TO § 2254 PETITION - 1 SERVICE 1 2 (1) By certified mail, the Clerk shall serve respondent and the Attorney General of 3 the State of Washington copies of petitioner’s habeas petition and any supporting pleadings or 4 documents. ANSWER OR OTHER RESPONSE 5 6 (1) Within 45 days of being served, respondent shall file and serve either an answer 7 or other response such as a dispositive motion or a motion to stay proceedings. An answer must 8 conform with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, and also indicate whether an 9 evidentiary hearing is necessary. 10 (2) Respondent must note the answer or other response for the court’s consideration 11 on the fourth Friday after filing. Petitioner’s response to the answer or other response must be 12 filed and served no later than the Monday immediately before the Friday designated for 13 consideration of the matter. Respondent’s reply must be filed no later than the Friday designated 14 for consideration of the matter. Counsel shall deliver to the Clerk’s Office a paper copy of any 15 electronically filed document that is more than 50 pages in length. The paper copy should be 16 clearly marked “Courtesy Chambers Copy.” MOTIONS 17 18 (1) Any request for court action must be made in a written motion that is properly 19 filed, served, and noted in accordance with Local Rule CR 7. All arguments supporting a motion 20 must be in the motion itself and not in a separate document. The caption of the motion must 21 designate the date the motion is to be noted for the court’s consideration. 22 23 ORDER SUBSTITUTING RESPONDENT AND DIRECTING SERVICE AND ANSWER TO § 2254 PETITION - 2 1 (2) The parties may not communicate directly with the District Judge or Magistrate 2 Judge regarding this case. All relevant inquiries, information and papers are to be directed to the 3 Clerk. 4 5 6 (3) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to the parties and to the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly. DATED this 8th day of February, 2018. 7 A 8 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ORDER SUBSTITUTING RESPONDENT AND DIRECTING SERVICE AND ANSWER TO § 2254 PETITION - 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?