Hovhannes Margaryan v. Warden of California City Detention
This text of Hovhannes Margaryan v. Warden of California City Detention (Hovhannes Margaryan v. Warden of California City Detention) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 HOVHANNES MARGARYAN, No. 1:25-cv-01582-WBS-EFB (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 WARDEN OF CALIFORNIA CITY DETENTION, 15 Respondent. 16
17 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 18 of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court has conducted a preliminary review of 19 the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 20 2254.1 Because petitioner may be entitled to the requested relief if the claimed violation of 21 constitutional rights is proved, respondent will be directed to show cause why the writ should not 22 be granted by filing an answer/return within 14 days from the date of this order. See 28 U.S.C. § 23 2243. Petitioner may file a reply/traverse to the answer/return within 7 days after being served a 24 copy of it. 25 //// 26
27 1 Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254 allows a district court to apply any or all of the rules to other types of habeas corpus petitions including § 28 2241 petitions. 1 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. Within 30 days from the date of this order, petitioner shall file an application to 3 || proceed in forma pauperis or pay the appropriate $5 filing fee for this action. The Clerk of Court 4 || 1s directed to send petitioner the application to proceed in forma pauperis for a non-prisoner. 5 2. Respondent is directed to file an answer/return within 14 days from the date of this 6 || order. If an answer/return is filed, respondent shall include with the answer/return any and all 7 || transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues presented in the 8 | application. 9 3. Petitioner’s reply/traverse, if any, is due within 7 days after being served a copy of 10 || respondent’s answer/return. 11 4. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of 12 || petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on the United 13 || States Attorney. 14 5. In order to ensure this court’s jurisdiction to resolve the pending § 2241 petition, 15 || respondent shall not transfer petitioner to another detention center outside of this judicial district, 16 || pending further order of the court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which 17 || empowers the federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective 18 || jurisdictions....”); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (emphasizing 19 | that federal courts have the power to “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction or maintain the status 20 || quo by injunction pending review of an agency’s action”).
22 || Dated: November 24, 2025 Lal elie 7 eZHE*? EDMUND F. BRENNAN 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hovhannes Margaryan v. Warden of California City Detention, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hovhannes-margaryan-v-warden-of-california-city-detention-caed-2025.