(HC) Iseli v. Warden

Opinion

BRANDON WILLIE ISELI, No. 2:24-cv-01934 KJM AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER Respondent. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On July 19, 2024, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty-one days. ECF No. 4. Petitioner filed a response to the findings and recommendations and requested the matter be transferred to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for authorization to proceed with a second or successive application for habeas relief. See ECF No. 6. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court HEREBY ORDERS as follows: ] 1. This action is dismissed without prejudice as second or successive; 2. Inthe interests of justice, plaintiffs request to transfer the petition to the Ninth Circuit is granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631; Ninth Circuit Rule 22-3; see also Amity Rubberized Pen Co. v. Mkt. Quest Group Inc., 793 F.3d 991, 996 (9th Cir. 2015) (noting the Ninth Circuit “has taken a broad view of when transfer is appropriate”). 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case and to transfer all original documents to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clerk is also directed to send petitioner a copy of Ninth Circuit Rule 22-3 and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Form 12. Petitioner is advised that this transfer does not constitute compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3) and Ninth Circuit Rule 22-3. 4. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 2253. DATED: October 4, 2024.

. □□□ STATES DISTRICT JUDGE