Carolyn M. Jones v. M. Gutierrez

O

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CAROLYN M. JONES, Case No. 5:21-cv-00655-JAK-KES Petitioner,

ORDER ACCEPTING AMENDED v.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION M. GUTIERREZ, Warden, et al., OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE Respondent.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition (Dkt. 1), the other records on file herein, and the Amended Report and Recommendation of the U.S. Magistrate Judge (Dkt. 10). No objections to the Amended Report and Recommendation were filed, and the deadline for filing such objections has passed. The Court accepts the report, findings, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: (1) Petitioner’s motion to supplement (Dkt. 8) is granted; (2) Petitioner’s motion for emergency hearing (Dkt. 2) is denied; (3) Grounds One, Two, Four, and Seven of the Petition (the claims challenging the merits and/or timing of Respondent’s residential reentry center/home confinement placement decision) are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; (4) Grounds Three and Six of the Petition (the claims related to COVID- 19) are dismissed without prejudice to Petitioner filing a civil rights action raising these claims; and (5) Ground Five of the Petition (the equal protection claim) is dismissed with prejudice. ! : Om VE

DATED: July 8, 2021 ll JOHN A. KRONSTADT UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

' As a federal prisoner proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, Petitioner is not required to obtain a certificate of appealability in order to appeal to the United States Court of Appeals in this case. See Harrison v. Ollison, 519 F.3d 952, 958 (9th Cir. 2008) (plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) does not require federal prisoners bringing § 2241 petitions to obtain a certificate in order to appeal, unless 38 the § 2241 petition “is merely a ‘disguised’ § 2255 petition’).