Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00300/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00300-7/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

---

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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VAATAUSILI MARK ALAIMALO, )

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

PAUL SCHULTZ, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-CV-0300 REC SMS HC

ORDER DISMISSING MOTION

[Doc. #38]

Petitioner is a federal prisoner who filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241. 

On September 29, 2005, the District Court dismissed the petition and terminated the case in

its entirety. Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration on October 20, 2005. The motion was

denied on November 16, 2005. On December 12, 2005, Petitioner filed a motion to supplement the

motion for reconsideration, and on March 9, 2006, he filed a motion for status of the case. The

undersigned dismissed the motions to supplement and for status of the case on March 13, 2006, and

reminded Petitioner that his case has been closed for nearly six months. Petitioner filed a notice of

appeal on March 22, 2006, and the appeal was processed on March 27, 2006. The petition is

currently pending on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Case 1:05-cv-00300-REC -SMS Document 41 Filed 04/06/06 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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 2

On March 30, 2006, Petitioner filed a pleading entitled “Motion to Submit (2) Two Missing 

Court’s Motions.” Petitioner has been repeatedly informed that his case was closed on September 29,

2005, yet Petitioner persists in attempting to litigate his case in this Court. As the petition is currently

on appeal to the Ninth Circuit, Petitioner must seek relief in that forum. Petitioner is advised that

future attempts to litigate the instant case in this Court such as the instant “Motion to Submit (2)

Two Missing Court’s Motions,” absent authorization or instruction from the Ninth Circuit, will be

summarily stricken, dismissed, or returned to Petitioner.

 Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion is hereby DISMISSED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 5, 2006 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00300-REC -SMS Document 41 Filed 04/06/06 Page 2 of 2