Lozano

(HC) Rouser v. Lozano

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 25, 20212:21-cv-00777California825 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM ROUSER, Case No. 2:21-cv-00777-KJM-JDP (HC) Petitioner, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THAT RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO

v. DISMISS BE GRANTED JARED LOZANO , OBJECTIONS DUE IN FOURTEEN DAYS Respondent. ECF No. 15 16 Petitioner William Rouser is a state prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1. Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the petition fails to state a cognizable claim. ECF No. 15. For the reasons stated below, I recommend that respondent’s motion be granted. No habeas corpus rule specifically applies to motions to dismiss. See Hillery v. Pulley, 533 F. Supp. 1189, 1194 (E.D. Cal. 1982) (“Motion practice in habeas corpus is not specifically provided for in the rules but must be inferred from their structure and the Advisory Committee Notes.”). Following an approach taken by other courts in this district, I conclude that Rule 4…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.