Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01564/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01564-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

TERMPSREF

WO MDR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Calvin Kuykendoll, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dennis Smith,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-1564-PHX-GMS (JRI)

ORDER

Petitioner Calvin Kuykendoll, who is confined in the Federal Correctional InstitutionPhoenix in Phoenix, Arizona, has filed a pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for a Writ

of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (Doc. 1) and has paid the filing fee. The

Court will call for an answer to the Petition.

I. Petition

In his Petition, Petitioner names Dennis Smith as the Respondent. Petitioner claims

that he was denied a fair and impartial disciplinary officer, in violation of his due process

rights, because the disciplinary hearing officer was actively involved in investigating and

writing the incident report that lead to Petitioner losing 54 days of good time credits.

Petitioner also challenges “the sufficiency of the evidence used to find him guilty of [the

disciplinary infractions], and the procedural requirements used[,] and [the] denial of his

constitutional right to have staff representation available to assist him.” Petitioner seeks to

Case 2:11-cv-01564-GMS Document 3 Filed 08/12/11 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

TERMPSREF - 2 -

have his good time credits restored and the incident report “thrown out and removed from

[his[ central file.”

Petitioner asserts that he has presented this issue to the Office of General Counsel.

The Court will require Respondent to answer the Petition.

II. Warnings

A. Address Changes

Petitioner must file and serve a notice of a change of address in accordance with Rule

83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure. Petitioner must not include a motion for other

relief with a notice of change of address. Failure to comply may result in dismissal of this

action.

B. Copies

Petitioner must serve Respondent, or counsel if an appearance has been entered, a

copy of every document that he files. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(a). Each filing must include a

certificate stating that a copy of the filing was served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d). Also, Petitioner

must submit an additional copy of every filing for use by the Court. LRCiv 5.4. Failure to

comply may result in the filing being stricken without further notice to Petitioner.

C. Possible Dismissal

If Petitioner fails to timely comply with every provision of this Order, including these

warnings, the Court may dismiss this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to

comply with any order of the Court).

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The Clerk of Court must serve a copy of the Summons, the Petition (Doc. 1),

and this Order upon the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona by certified mail

addressed to the civil process clerk at the office of the United States Attorney pursuant to

Rule 4(i)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Clerk of Court must also send

by certified mail a copy of the Summons, the Petition, and this Order to the United States

Case 2:11-cv-01564-GMS Document 3 Filed 08/12/11 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

TERMPSREF - 3 -

Attorney General pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(B) and to Respondent pursuant to Rule 4(i)(2) of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

 (2) Respondent Dennis Smith must answer the Petition within 20 days of the date

of service. Respondent shall not file a dispositive motion in place of an answer without first

showing cause as to why an answer is inadequate.

(3) Petitioner may file a reply within 30 days from the date of service of the

answer.

(4) This matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Jay R. Irwin pursuant to Rules 72.1

and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and

recommendation.

DATED this 12th day of August, 2011.

Case 2:11-cv-01564-GMS Document 3 Filed 08/12/11 Page 3 of 3