Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00250/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00250-0/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

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NEIL CORROW,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-06-0250 DFL CMK 

vs.

BUREAU OF U.S. PRISONS, et al.,

Respondents. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Movant, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion to vacate, set

aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Petitioner has paid the required filing

fee. 

The crux of plaintiff’s petition appears to be that he seeks a transfer to Los

Angeles County for his upcoming surgery. It appears that petitioner is challenging the conditions

of his confinement to the extent that he seeks transfer to another prison. Petitioner does not

challenge the duration or legality of his confinement. To the extent that petitioner challenges the

conditions of his confinement, federal habeas relief is not available. A habeas corpus petition is

the proper method to challenge the legality or duration of confinement, but a civil rights action is

the proper method to challenging the conditions of confinement. See Badea v. Cox, 931 F.2d

573, 574 (9th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, it is appropriate to dismiss this action without issuing an

Case 2:06-cv-00250-DFL-CMK Document 3 Filed 07/17/06 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

2

order to show cause. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243; Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 298-99 (1969). 

Based on the foregoing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that petitioner’s application for a

writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the

specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951

F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: July 14, 2006.

______________________________________

CRAIG M. KELLISON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00250-DFL-CMK Document 3 Filed 07/17/06 Page 2 of 2