Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FRANCIQUE POUCHON, Case No.: 26-cv-3881-RSH-JLB 12 Petitioner, ORDER DISMISSING PETITION 13 v. FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 14 CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, Warden, 15 Respondent. 16 17 On July 6, 2026, petitioner Francique Pouchon filed a petition for writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (the “Petition”). ECF No. 1. 19 Title 28 of the U.S. Code, Section 2241, provides that “[w]rits of habeas corpus may 20 be granted by the Supreme Court, any justice thereof, the district courts and any circuit 21 judge within their respective jurisdictions.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(a). A detainee bears the 22 burden of demonstrating that “[h]e is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or 23 treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3). Rule 4 of the Rules Governing 24 Section 2254 Cases in the U.S. District Courts (the “Habeas Rules”) requires summary 25 dismissal of a federal habeas petition “[i]f it plainly appears from the petition and any 26 attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court.” See also 27 Habeas Rule 1(b) (permitting district courts to apply Habeas Rules to Section 2241 habeas 28 1 || proceedings); Lane v. Feather, 584 F. App’x 843, 843 (9th Cir. 2014) (affirming district 2 ||court’s application of Habeas Rule 4 to dismiss Section 2241 petition). 3 This 1s Petitioner’s fourth habeas petition filed in recent months. See Case No. 26- 4 ||cv-1126 (petition filed Feb. 20, 2026; petition granted and bond hearing ordered on Mar. 5 || 12, 2026); Case No. 26-cv-2304 (petition filed Apr. 15, 2026; dismissed on Apr. 16, 2026); 6 || Case No. 26-cv-2722 (petition filed Apr. 30, 2026). The third petition remains pending. 7 ||Petitioner’s fourth petition is duplicative of his third, and indeed, includes much of the 8 ||}same language verbatim. A habeas petition is subject to summary dismissal when it is 9 repetitive or duplicative. See, e.g., Salas v. Att’y Gen., No. 2:23-cv-1118-TL-TLF, 2023 10 || WL 5826738, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 21, 2023). “Plaintiffs generally have ‘no right to 11 ||maintain two separate actions involving the same subject matter at the same time in the 12 ||same court and against the same defendant.’” Adams v. Cal. Dep't of Health Servs., 487 13 || F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007) (citation omitted) (affirming dismissal of a later-filed 14 || duplicative lawsuit). 15 Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES the Petition in the instant case without 16 || prejudice to Petitioner’s pursuit of relief in his other pending habeas case, No. 26-cv-2722. 17 || The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 8, 2026 C / □ Hon. Robert S. Huie United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28