What is the effect of improper "R" suffix designation on a second amended habeas corpus petition?

On June 1, 2017 this court screened petitioner's first amended habeas corpus petition challenging his improper "R" suffix designation and concluded that the claims presented were not cognizable on habeas because the relief he sought would not lead to his speedier release from custody. ECF No. 8 at 2-3. The court also noted petitioner's pending civil rights lawsuit in Lathan v. CDCR, 2:16-cv-0757 TLN CMK P, which raises the same challenges to his "R" suffix designation. Id. at 2. As a result, the undersigned recommended summarily dismissing petitioner's first amended habeas corpus petition.