(HC) Cloud v. Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County

District Court, E.D. California·Decided August 18, 2020·No. 1:20-cv-00904·Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 JOEL JAMES CLOUD, ) Case No.: 1:20-cv-00904-AWI-JLT (HC) ) 12 Petitioner, ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ) CHANGE NAME OF RESPONDENT 13 v. ) ) 14 CDCR/DIRECTOR, ) 15 Respondent. ) ) 16 )

17 On July 31, 2020, the Court dismissed the petition with leave to file a first amended petition 18 for failure to name a proper respondent. (Doc. 15.) Petitioner filed a first amended petition on August 19 14, 2020, in which he names “Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County” as the Respondent. (Doc. 16 at 20 1.) Because it appears the Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County is a proper party (Rule 2(a) of the 21 Rules Governing § 2254 Cases; Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996); Stanley v. 22 California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359, 360 (9th Cir. 1994)), the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to 23 change the name of the Respondent to Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County. 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED.

26 Dated: August 18, 2020 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 27 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(HC) Cloud v. Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County, (E.D. Cal. 2020).

(HC) Cloud v. Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County ((HC) Cloud v. Warden of CSP/Los Angeles County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jerry F. Stanley v. California Supreme Court
21 F.3d 359 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez
81 F.3d 891 (Ninth Circuit, 1996)