Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00576/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00576-0/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

 1 “Doc.#” refers to the docket number of documents filed in this action.

TERMPSREF

WO SC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jeffrey J. Cantú, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Craig Apker,

Respondent. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-0576-PHX-SMM (GEE)

ORDER

Petitioner Jeffrey J. Cantú, who is confined in the Federal Correctional Institution in

Phoenix, Arizona, has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal

Custody (28 U.S.C. § 2241)(Petition) and a Memorandum in support thereof. (Doc.# 1, 3.)1

He has paid the $5.00 filing fee. The Court will order the Petition and Memorandum served

on Respondent, the United States Attorney for the District of the United States, and the

United States Attorney General. Further, the Court will refer this case to Magistrate Judge

Edmonds for further proceedings and a Report and Recommendation. 

I. Background

Petitioner alleges one ground for relief in his Petition. He asserts that he lost 41 days

good time credit after he was found guilty of possession, introduction, or manufacture of a

dangerous weapon while he was confined in the United States Penitentiary in Lompoc,

Case 2:08-cv-00576-SMM Document 4 Filed 05/09/08 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

TERMPSREF 28 - 2 -

California. (Doc.# 1 at 1, 4; 3 at 1, 2-4, 10-11.) Petitioner contends that he was convicted

on insufficient evidence in violation of his due process rights. (Doc.# 3 at 2-4, 10-11.)

II. Response to the Petition 

Petitioner alleges that he was deprived of good time credits and seeks expungement

of his disciplinary record. Respondent will be required to respond to the Petition as

supported by the Memorandum. 

III. 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 Respondents, 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, Petition and

Memorandum, and this Order upon the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona by

Case 2:08-cv-00576-SMM Document 4 Filed 05/09/08 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

TERMPSREF 28 - 3 -

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 also

must send by certified mail a copy of the Summons, Petition and Memorandum, and this

Order to the United States Attorney General pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(B) and to Respondent

pursuant to Rule 4(i)(2)(A).

(2) Respondent must answer the Petition as supported by the Memorandum within

20 days of the date of service. Respondent may not file a dispositive motion in place of an

answer, but may file an answer limited to relevant affirmative defenses, including but not

limited to, statute of limitations, procedural bar, or non-retroactivity. If the answer is limited

to affirmative defenses, only those portions of the record relevant to those defenses need be

attached to the answer. Failure to set forth an affirmative defense in an answer may be

treated as a waiver of the defense. Day v. McDonough, 126 S.Ct. 1675 (2006).

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

answer.

(4) This action is referred to Magistrate Judge Glenda E. Edmonds 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 8th day of May, 2008.

Case 2:08-cv-00576-SMM Document 4 Filed 05/09/08 Page 3 of 3