Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01013/USCOURTS-casd-3_11-cv-01013-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

K:\COMMON\Chmb_Anello\ODD # CIVIL CASES\PRO SE LAW CLERKS ORDERS\11cv1013-dismiss.wpd, 52011 -1- 11cv1013

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY AUVIL, Civil No. 11-1013 MMA (BGS)

Petitioner,

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION

WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH

LEAVE TO AMEND

v.

UNKNOWN,

Respondent.

Petitioner, a state prisoner represented by counsel, has submitted a Petition for Writ of

Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and paid the $5.00 filing fee. Review of the

Petition reveals that Petitioner has failed to name a proper respondent. On federal habeas, a state

prisoner must name the state officer having custody of him as the respondent. Ortiz-Sandoval

v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996) (citing Rule 2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254). “The

‘state officer having custody’ may be ‘either the warden of the institution in which the petitioner

is incarcerated . . . or the chief officer in charge of state penal institutions.’” Id. (quoting Rule

2(a), 28 U.S.C. foll. § 2254 advisory committee’s note). 

Here, Petitioner has failed to name a Respondent. In order for this Court to entertain the

Petition filed in this action, Petitioner must name the warden currently in charge of the state

correctional facility in which Petitioner is presently confined or the Secretary of the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Brittingham v. United States, 982 F.2d 378, 379

(9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). 

Case 3:11-cv-01013-MMA-POR Document 2 Filed 05/20/11 Page 1 of 2
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

K:\COMMON\Chmb_Anello\ODD # CIVIL CASES\PRO SE LAW CLERKS ORDERS\11cv1013-dismiss.wpd, 52011 -2- 11cv1013

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Petition without prejudice and with leave to

amend due to Petitioner’s failure to name a proper respondent. To have this case reopened,

Petitioner must file a First Amended Petition no later than July 17, 2011 in conformance with

this Order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: May 20, 2011

Hon. Michael M. Anello

United States District Judge

Copies to: ALL PARTIES

Case 3:11-cv-01013-MMA-POR Document 2 Filed 05/20/11 Page 2 of 2