Robert Gomez v. Judge David Swanson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ROBERT GOMEZ, Petitioner, v. Case No. 26-cv-0675-bhl JUDGE DAVID SWANSON, Respondent. ______________________________________________________________________________ RULE 4 SCREENING ORDER ______________________________________________________________________________ Petitioner Robert Gomez, proceeding pro se, has filed an application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2241, (ECF No. 1), and a motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, (ECF No. 2). Under 28 U.S.C. §2241(c), habeas relief may be extended to a prisoner only when he “is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. §2241(c)(3). This includes challenges by non-citizens in immigration related matters. Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 687 (2001). Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing §2254 Cases, which the Court also applies to §2241 petitions, see Rule 1(b), Rules Governing §2254 Cases; Civil Local Rule 9(a)(2), the Court will review and screen the petition. As part of the screening process, the Court will dismiss the petition if “it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” See Rule 4, Rules Governing §2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Pursuant to this rule, a district court is “authorized to dismiss summarily any habeas petition that appears legally insufficient on its face[.]” McFarland v. Scott, 512 U.S. 849, 856 (1994).

Gomez’s petition is legally insufficient on its face. Gomez fails to identify the subject of his application or provide any relevant information. Instead, he simply identifies “Judge David Swanson” and cryptically states “[b]ecause they fired my last Attorney Kara M. Rolf she was doing her job they fired her for no reason.” (ECF No. 1 at 3, 5.) Gomez leaves Sections IV “Grounds For Relief” and V “Request for Relief” of his application entirely blank. (Id. at 11–13.) Because Gomez has not plausibly alleged facts that would entitle him to habeas relief, the Court will deny his petition and dismiss this action. The Court will also deny his separate motion for leave to proceed without payment of the filing fee as moot.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. §2241, ECF No. 1, is DENIED without prejudice and this case is dismissed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee, ECF No. 2, is DENIED as moot.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case.

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin on April 20, 2026. s/ Brett H. Ludwig BRETT H. LUDWIG United States District Judge