Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_15-cv-00045/USCOURTS-azd-4_15-cv-00045-1/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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Gregory McCauley, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

Louis Winn, 

Respondent.

No. CV-15-00045-TUC-RCC

ORDER 

 Currently pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Gregory McCauley’s Motion to 

Find Respondent in Default [Judgement] Pursuant to Rule 55(a) Fed. R. Civ. P. (Doc. 

10), Magistrate Judge Bruce G. Macdonald’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) 

regarding this motion (Doc. 12), Petitioner’s objections to the R&R (Doc. 13) and 

Respondent’s Response to these objections (Doc. 14). For the following reasons, this 

Court will adopt the findings and conclusions of R & R and deny Petitioner’s Motion for 

Default (Doc. 10). 

I. Background 

 Pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure, this matter 

was referred to Magistrate Judge Macdonald for Report and Recommendation. Together 

with his Reply to Respondent’s Response to Petitioner’s Habeas Petition, Petitioner 

moved for the Court to find Respondent in default. Doc. 10. On January 14, 2016 

Magistrate Judge Macdonald recommended this Court (1) substitute J.T. Shartle as 

Case 4:15-cv-00045-RCC Document 15 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 4
- 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 

respondent in place of Louis W. Winn Jr. and (2) deny Petitioner’s Motion to Find 

Respondent in Default (Doc. 10). Doc. 12 at 2:23-27. Petitioner filed timely objections to 

Magistrate Judge Macdonald’s R&R (Doc. 13), to which Respondent filed a Response 

(Doc. 14). 

II. Legal Standard 

 The duties of the district court in connection with a R & R are set forth in Rule 72 

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district court may 

“accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or 

return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 

 The Court will not disturb a magistrate judge’s order unless his factual findings 

are clearly erroneous or his legal conclusions are contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1)(A). “[T]he magistrate judge’s decision...is entitled to great deference by the 

district court.” U.S. v. Abonce-Barrera, 257 F.3d 959, 969 (9th Cir. 2001). Where the 

parties object to an R & R, “[a] judge of the [district] court shall make a de novo

determination of those portions of the [R & R] to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 

636(b)(1); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985). 

III. Issues Presented 

A. Substitution of Respondent J.T. Shartle as Respondent 

As an initial matter, Magistrate Judge Macdonald took judicial notice that the 

listed Respondent Louis W. Winn, Jr. is no longer the warden of United States 

Penitentiary–Tucson (“USP–Tucson”) and recommended that the new Warden of USP–

Tucson, J. T. Shartle, be substituted as Respondent in place of Winn. This Court finds 

Magistrate Judge Macdonald’s findings on this issue to be thorough and well-reasoned, 

and, there being no objection, adopts the recommendation that J.T. Shartle be substituted 

as Respondent for Louis W. Winn. 

B. Default Judgment 

 Petitioner seeks default judgment because Respondent’s Return and Answer to his 

Case 4:15-cv-00045-RCC Document 15 Filed 02/22/16 Page 2 of 4
- 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 

Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and Motion to Dismiss [were] allegedly untimely. 

Doc. 10. 

 In considering this issue Magistrate Judge Macdonald reviewed the Order 

requiring Respondent to answer the Petition (Doc. 6), the certified mail receipt 

documenting the date that Order was served on Respondent (Doc. 7), and the date 

Respondent filed his Answer (Doc. 9). Magistrate Judge MacDonald concluded that 

Respondent’s April 1, 2015 Answer was timely based upon the language of the March 9, 

2015 Order (directing Respondent to answer the Petition within 20 days of the date of 

service) and a 20 day date calculation (commencing on March, 12, 2015, the date of 

service on Respondent, as memorialized in the certified mail receipt). 

 Petitioner objects that Magistrate Judge MacDonald has misread the language in 

the Court’s March 9, 2015. Petitioner is incorrect. The March 9, 2015 Order does state: 

“Respondent Louis Winn must answer the Petition within 20 days of the date of service.” 

Doc. 6 at 3:9-10. Moreover, Magistrate Judge Macdonald’s date calculation is accurate 

and Respondent’s April 1, 2015 Answer was timely. 

 Petitioner also objects that the Magistrate Judge’s warning regarding Local Rule 

7.2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure does not apply and that he may seek new 

relief in a reply memorandum. This objection is, however, moot as the Magistrate Judge 

considered and addressed Respondent’s new, requested relief in the R&R at issue. 

Accordingly, 

... 

... 

... 

... 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Macdonald’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 12) is hereby ACCEPTED and ADOPTED as the findings of 

fact and conclusions of law by this Court. 

Case 4:15-cv-00045-RCC Document 15 Filed 02/22/16 Page 3 of 4
- 4 - 

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 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED SUBSTITUTING J.T. Shartle, Warden as Respondent 

for Louis W. Winn, Jr. pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 

and Rule 43(c)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner’s Motion to Find Respondent in Default (Doc. 

10) is denied. 

 Dated this 22nd day of February, 2016. 

Case 4:15-cv-00045-RCC Document 15 Filed 02/22/16 Page 4 of 4