Harleman v. Warden
This text of Harleman v. Warden (Harleman v. Warden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 PAUL HENRI MARIE HARLEMAN, CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00926-BJR-DWC 11 Petitioner, v. ORDER FOR SERVICE AND 12 RETURN, § 2241 PETITION WARDEN, FEDERAL DETENTION 13 CENTER SEATAC, 14 Respondent.
15 Petitioner has filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, allegedly challenging the 16 execution of his federal sentence by the United States Bureau of Prisons. Dkt. 3. Having 17 reviewed the Petition, the Court hereby ORDERS: 18 (1) Service 19 The Clerk shall arrange for service upon Respondent (the Warden of the Federal 20 Detention Center at SeaTac), upon the United States Attorney General in Washington, D.C., and 21 upon the civil process clerk at the Office of the United States Attorney for the Western District 22 of Washington, of copies of the petition and of this Order, by registered or certified mail, return 23 receipt requested. 24 1 (2) Return 2 Within 30 days of the date this Order is posted, Respondent shall show cause why a 3 writ of habeas corpus should not be granted by filing a Return as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 4 The Return shall first address whether § 2241 is the proper vehicle for addressing Petitioner’s
5 challenge and if jurisdiction lies with the custodial court. See generally Hernandez v. Campbell, 6 204 F.3d 861 (9th Cir. 2000). If the challenge may proceed under § 2241 and is properly before 7 this Court, then Respondent shall also address and submit evidence relevant to Petitioner’s 8 allegation that his sentence is being unlawfully executed. As a part of such return, Respondent 9 shall submit a memorandum of authorities in support of their position and should state whether 10 an evidentiary hearing is necessary. Respondent shall file the Return with the Clerk of the Court 11 and shall serve a copy upon Petitioner. 12 The Return will be treated in accordance with LCR 7. Accordingly, on the face of the 13 Return, Respondent shall note it for consideration no earlier than 28 days after filing. Petitioner 14 may file and serve a response not later than 21 days after the filing date of the Return, and
15 Respondent may file and serve a reply brief not later than 28 days after the return is filed. 16 (3) Filing by Parties, Generally 17 All attorneys admitted to practice before this Court are required to file documents 18 electronically via the Court’s CM/ECF system. All non-attorneys, such as pro se parties and/or 19 prisoners, may continue to file a paper original with the Clerk. All filings must indicate in the 20 upper right-hand corner the name of the United States Magistrate Judge to whom the document 21 is directed. 22 For any party filing electronically, when the total of all pages of a filing exceeds fifty 23 (50) pages in length, a paper copy of the document (with tabs or other organizing aids as
24 1 necessary) shall be delivered to the Clerk’s Office for chambers. The chambers copy must be 2 clearly marked with the words “Courtesy Copy of Electronic Filing for Chambers.” Any 3 document filed with the Court must be accompanied by proof that it has been served upon all 4 parties that have entered a notice of appearance in the underlying matter.
5 (4) Motions 6 Any request for court action shall be set forth in a motion, properly filed and served. 7 Pursuant to LCR 7(b), any argument being offered in support of a motion shall be submitted as a 8 part of the motion itself and not in a separate document. The motion shall include in its caption 9 (immediately below the title of the motion) a designation of the date the motion is to be noted for 10 consideration on the Court’s motion calendar. 11 (5) Direct Communications with District Judge or Magistrate Judge 12 No direct communication is to take place with the District Judge or Magistrate Judge with 13 regard to this case. All relevant information and papers are to be directed to the Clerk. 14 The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Petitioner and the Honorable Barbara
15 J. Rothstein. 16 Dated this 12th day of July, 2024. 17 A 18 David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Harleman v. Warden, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harleman-v-warden-wawd-2024.