Lebedev Mikhail v. Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: December 3, 2025
• Docket: 1:25-cv-01414
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LEBEDEV MIKHAIL, No. 1:25-cv-01414-SKO (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO ASSIGN DISTRICT JUDGE 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 14 TO GRANT RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION AS 15 WARDEN OF THE GOLDEN STATE DUPLICATIVE ANNEX, et al., 16 [Doc. 6] Respondents. 17 [21-DAY DEADLINE] 18 19 Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his indefinite detention 20 by the United States Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). 21 Petitioner filed the instant petition on October 23, 2025. (Doc. 1.) On October 28, 2025, 22 the Court issued an order directing Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be 23 granted. (Doc. 3.) On November 26, 2025, Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition as 24 duplicative. (Doc. 6.) Petitioner filed a traverse to the motion on December 1, 2025. (Doc. 8.) 25 Upon review of the pleadings, the Court concludes the petition is duplicative of an earlier filed 26 and pending petition. Therefore, the Court will recommend Respondent’s motion be GRANTED. 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 DISCUSSION 2 I. Motion to Dismiss 3 Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases allows a district court to dismiss a 4 petition if it “plainly appears from the face of the petition and any exhibits annexed to it that the 5 petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court . . . .” Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 6 2254 Cases. 7 The Ninth Circuit has allowed Respondent’s to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of an 8 answer if the motion attacks the pleadings for failing to exhaust state remedies or being in 9 violation of the state’s procedural rules. See, e.g., O’Bremski v. Maass, 915 F.2d 418, 420 (9th 10 Cir. 1990) (using Rule 4 to evaluate motion to dismiss petition for failure to exhaust state 11 remedies); White v. Lewis, 874 F.2d 599, 602-03 (9th Cir. 1989) (using Rule 4 as procedural 12 grounds to review motion to dismiss for state procedural default); Hillery v. Pulley, 533 F.Supp. 13 1189, 1194 & n.12 (E.D. Cal. 1982) (same). Thus, a respondent can file a motion to dismiss after 14 the court orders a response, and the court should use Rule 4 standards to review the motion. See 15 Hillery, 533 F. Supp. at 1194 & n. 12. 16 In this case, Respondent's motion to dismiss is based on the contention that the petition is 17 duplicative of a prior case. Accordingly, the Court will review Respondent’s motion to dismiss 18 pursuant to its authority under Rule 4. 19 II. Legal Standard 20 Duplicative lawsuits filed by a petitioner proceeding in forma pauperis are subject to 21 dismissal as either frivolous or malicious under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). See, e.g., Cato v. United 22 States, 70 F.3d 1103, 1105 n. 2 (9th Cir.1995); McWilliams v. State of Colo., 121 F.3d 573, 574 23 (10th Cir.1997); Pittman v. Moore, 980 F.2d 994, 994–95 (5th Cir.1993); Bailey v. Johnson, 846 24 F.2d 1019, 1021 (5th Cir.1988). An in forma pauperis complaint that merely repeats pending or 25 previously litigated claims may be considered abusive and dismissed under § 1915. Cato, 70 F.3d 26 at 1105 n. 2; Bailey, 846 F.2d at 1021. “Dismissal of the duplicative lawsuit, more so than the 27 issuance of a stay or the enjoinment of proceedings, promotes judicial economy and the 28 comprehensive disposition of litigation.” Adams v. California, 487 F.3d 684, 688, 692–94 (9th 1 Cir. 2007). 2 III. Analysis 3 On October 23, 2025, Petitioner filed the instant petition challenging his prolonged 4 detention. Petitioner previously filed an identical petition on October 17, 2025, in Lebedev v. 5 Warden of the Golden State Annex, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-01391-SAB (HC). That case is 6 currently pending with a briefing schedule ordered on October 20, 2025. The Court finds that this 7 case is duplicative of Petitioner’s prior current pending case and should be dismissed. 8 ORDER 9 The Clerk of Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case. 10 RECOMMENDATION 11 Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Respondent’s motion 12 to dismiss the petition as duplicative be GRANTED and the case be DISMISSED. 13 This Findings and Recommendation is submitted to the United States District Court Judge 14 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Rule 304 of the 15 Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Within 16 twenty-one (21) days after being served with a copy of this Findings and Recommendation, a 17 party may file written objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Id. The document 18 should be captioned, “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation” and shall 19 not exceed fifteen (15) pages, except by leave of court with good cause shown. The Court will not 20 consider exhibits attached to the Objections. To the extent a party wishes to refer to any 21 exhibit(s), the party should reference the exhibit in the record by its CM/ECF document and page 22 number, when possible, or otherwise reference the exhibit with specificity. Any pages filed in 23 excess of the fifteen (15) page limitation may be disregarded by the District Judge when 24 reviewing these Findings and Recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C). The 25 parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may result in the waiver 26 of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 838-39 (9th Cir. 2014). This 27 recommendation is not an order that is immediately appealable to the Ninth Circuit Court of 28 Appeals. Any notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 1 should not be filed until entry of the District Court's judgment. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 3

4 Dated: December 2, 2025 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto . UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28