(HC) Plaza-Uzeta v. Taylor

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RUBEN PLAZA-UZETA, Case No. 1:23-cv-01773-HBK (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER GRANTING CLARIFICATION TO LIMITED EXTENT1 13 v. (Doc. No. 24) 14 TAYLOR, FCI Mendota Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Before the Court is Petitioner’s “motion for clarification of judgment.” (Doc. No. 24, 18 “Motion”). Petitioner Ruben Plaza-Uzeta is a federal prisoner who initiated this action by filing a 19 pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. No. 1, “Petition”). On 20 October 15, 2024, the undersigned granted Respondent’s motion to dismiss the Petition, the 21 Petition was dismissed, and judgment was entered the same day. (Doc. Nos. 19-20). On October 22 29, 2024, Petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, and the Appeal was processed to the U.S. Court of 23 Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on the same day. (Doc. Nos. 21-22). On January 13, 2025, 24 Petitioner filed the instant Motion requesting clarification as to whether a certificate of 25 appealability “would be required on appeal.” (Doc. No. 24). In support of the Motion, Petitioner 26 attaches a November 14, 2024 “docketing notice” from the Ninth Circuit indicating that “[n]o 27 1 Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 28 § 636(c)(1). (Doc. No. 18). 1 | briefing schedule will be set until the Ninth Circuit and/or the district court determines whether a 2 | certificate of appealability should issue.” (Jd. at 24). 3 As an initial matter, the Court has not received any direction from the Ninth Circuit to 4 | issue a decision as to whether a certificate of appealability should issue. (See docket). A review 5 | of the docket in the Ninth Circuit similarly reveals no instruction to this Court regarding the 6 || issuance of a certificate of appealability. See Plaza-Uzeta v. Taylor, Case No. 24-6902.” 7 | Regardless, as a federal prisoner proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Petitioner is not required to 8 | obtain a certificate of appealability to proceed with his appeal to the Ninth Circuit. See Harrison 9 | v. Ollison, 519 F.3d 952, 958 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 10 | 2253(c)(1) does not require federal prisoners bringing § 2241 petitions to obtain a COA in order 11 | to appeal, unless the § 2241 petition “is merely a ‘disguised’ § 2255 petition.”’). 12 Accordingly, it is ORDERED: 13 Petitioner’s motion for clarification (Doc. No. 24) is GRANTED to the extent described 14 herein and otherwise DENIED. 15 '© Dated: _ April 4, 2025 Mile. Wh fareh Zaskth 17 HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA ig UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 || * The Court takes judicial notice of the docket of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, available on PACER. See United States v. Wilson, 631F.2d 118, 119 (9th Cir. 2980) (court may take 28 judicial notice of court records).