In Re: Kambiz Bakhtiari

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: December 19, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02346
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 In Re: Case No.: 2:25-cv-02346-APG-NJK Kambiz Bakhtiari, 4 Order Directing Petitioner. Service of the Petition and 5 Appointing Counsel

6 [ECF No. 1-1]

7 8 Petitioner Kambiz Bakhtiari, immigration detainee, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of 9 Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1-1. Following a preliminary review of the 10 petition, I determine that appointment of counsel is warranted. Generally, habeas petitioners not 11 sentenced to death are not entitled to appointed counsel unless the circumstances indicate that 12 appointed counsel is necessary to prevent due process violations. See Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 13 1191, 1196 (9th Cir. 1986) (citing Kreiling v. Field, 431 F.2d 638, 640 (9th Cir. 1970) (per 14 curiam)). I may, however, appoint counsel if the interests of justice so require. See 18 U.S.C. 15 § 3006A; Chaney, 801 F.2d at 1196. Here, Petitioner is unrepresented and stands to lose his 16 right to an adjudication of his petition on the merits due to ignorance of technical procedural 17 requirements. In addition, this case concerns immigration proceedings and removal, thus the 18 outcome of this litigation is likely to have serious consequences for Petitioner. I therefore find 19 that appointment of counsel is in the interests of justice and appoint counsel. 20 In addition, Petitioner has not named a respondent. Habeas petitions brought under section 21 2241 “shall…name the person who has custody over him.” 28 U.S.C. § 2242. Therefore, the 22 “one proper respondent” in habeas petitions challenging continued immigration detention is “the 23 warden of the facility where the petitioner is being held, not the Attorney General or some other 1]/remote supervisory official.” Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1195 (9th Cir. 2024) (quoting Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004)). Here, Bakhtiari fails to name any respondents. In this way, the petition does not follow the requirements laid out by statute. But notably, the Doe v. Garland petitioner was represented by multiple attorneys and civil rights organizations. 5} See 109 F.4th at 1189. 6 I HEREBY ORDER that the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nevada (FPD) is 7\| appointed to represent Petitioner. If the FPD is unable to represent Petitioner because of a 8|| conflict of interest or for any other reason, alternate counsel will be appointed. In either case, counsel will represent Petitioner in all federal court proceedings relating to this matter, unless 10} allowed to withdraw. 11 I FURTHER ORDER the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to the Federal Public Defender and the CJA coordinator for this division. 13 I FURTHER ORDER that the FPD will have until January 7, 2026 to appear for Petitioner and file an amended petition for writ of habeas corpus which names the correct respondent on his behalf. 16 DATED this 19th day of December, 2025. 17 ge— ANDREWP.GORDON. 19 CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20 21 22 23