Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al.

W.D. Louisiana

Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al.

DecidedNovember 19, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-01816

StatusUnknown

This text of Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al. (Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al., (W.D. La. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JOSE ALVARES GOMEZ, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-896-G ) B.O.P. FEDERAL et al., ) ) Respondents. )

ORDER On August 11, 2025, Petitioner Jose Alvares Gomez, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, filed a petition seeking federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Pet. (Doc. No. 1). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin for initial proceedings. On August 21, 2025, Judge Erwin issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 4), in which he recommended that this action be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Judge Erwin explained that Petitioner is incarcerated at FCI Pollock in Pollock, Louisiana, and the Petition “must be filed in the district where the prisoner is confined.” Haugh v. Booker, 210 F.3d 1147, 1149 (10th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 98(c). Judge Erwin further determined that transfer was in the interest of justice. See R. & R. at 1-2. In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Erwin advised Petitioner of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation by September 8, 2025. Judge Erwin also advised that a failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to appellate review of the factual findings and legal conclusions contained in the Report and Recommendation. As of this date, Petitioner has not submitted an objection to the Report and Recommendation or sought leave for additional time to do so.’ CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 4) is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of November, 2025.

(Vaal B. Kodo United States District Judge

' The Report and Recommendation was mailed to Petitioner at the address on file with the Court and returned as undeliverable. See Doc. No. 6.

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JOSE ALVARES GOMEZ, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-896-G ) B.O.P. FEDERAL et al., ) ) Respondents. )

ORDER On August 11, 2025, Petitioner Jose Alvares Gomez, a federal prisoner appearing pro se, filed a petition seeking federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See Pet. (Doc. No. 1). In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Shon T. Erwin for initial proceedings. On August 21, 2025, Judge Erwin issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 4), in which he recommended that this action be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. Judge Erwin explained that Petitioner is incarcerated at FCI Pollock in Pollock, Louisiana, and the Petition “must be filed in the district where the prisoner is confined.” Haugh v. Booker, 210 F.3d 1147, 1149 (10th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also 28 U.S.C. § 98(c). Judge Erwin further determined that transfer was in the interest of justice. See R. & R. at 1-2. In the Report and Recommendation, Judge Erwin advised Petitioner of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation by September 8, 2025. Judge Erwin also advised that a failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the right to appellate review of the factual findings and legal conclusions contained in the Report and Recommendation. As of this date, Petitioner has not submitted an objection to the Report and Recommendation or sought leave for additional time to do so.’ CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 4) is ADOPTED in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of November, 2025.

(Vaal B. Kodo United States District Judge

' The Report and Recommendation was mailed to Petitioner at the address on file with the Court and returned as undeliverable. See Doc. No. 6.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jose Alvares Gomez v. B.O.P. Federal et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jose-alvares-gomez-v-bop-federal-et-al-lawd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack