Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00750/USCOURTS-caed-1_16-cv-00750-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Fresno Federal Court House
Respondent
Adrian Jackson
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADRIAN JACKSON,

Petitioner,

v.

FRESNO FEDERAL COURT HOUSE,

Respondent.

Case No. 1:16-cv-00750-SAB-HC

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER LEAVE 

TO FILE A MOTION TO AMEND THE 

PETITION AND NAME A PROPER 

RESPONDENT

Petitioner a federal detainee proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

In this case, Petitioner names “Fresno Federal Court House” as the Respondent. 

“[L]ongstanding practice confirms that in habeas challenges to present physical confinement—

„core challenges‟—the default rule is that the proper respondent is the warden of the facility 

where the prisoner is being held . . . .” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004). As no 

exceptions to the immediate custodial rule apply here, it is insufficient to name “Fresno Federal 

Court House” as the Respondent.

A petitioner‟s failure to name a proper respondent requires dismissal of his habeas 

petition for lack of personal jurisdiction. Stanley v. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360

(9th Cir. 1994). However, the Court will give Petitioner the opportunity to cure this defect by 

amending the petition to name a proper respondent, such as the warden of his facility. See

Case 1:16-cv-00750-DAD-SAB Document 4 Filed 08/02/16 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

2

Dubrin v. California, 720 F.3d 1095, 1100 (9th Cir. 2013) (petitioner should be granted leave to 

amend petition to name proper respondent). In the interests of judicial economy, Petitioner need 

not file an amended petition. Instead, Petitioner may file a motion entitled “Motion to Amend the 

Petition to Name a Proper Respondent” wherein Petitioner may name the proper respondent in 

this action.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner is GRANTED THIRTY (30) 

days from the date of service of this order in which to file a motion to amend the petition to 

name a proper respondent. Petitioner is forewarned that failure to follow this order and amend 

the petition to state a proper respondent will result a recommendation that the petition be

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 2, 2016 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00750-DAD-SAB Document 4 Filed 08/02/16 Page 2 of 2