Ivan Medina Ronulo v. Kristi Noem, et al.

• Court: District Court, W.D. Washington
• Decided: December 17, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02543
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 IVAN MEDINA RONULO, CASE NO. 2:25-cv-02543-RAJ-GJL 11 Petitioner, v. ORDER SETTING BRIEFING 12 SCHEDULE AND GIVING KRISTI NOEM, et al., NOTICE OF RIGHT TO CONSENT 13 Respondents. 14

15 Petitioner Ivan Medina Ronulo, through counsel, has filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas 16 Petition, challenging his detention by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). Dkt. 17 1. The filing fee has been paid. See id. 18 The Court has discretion to determine when a response to a § 2241 habeas petition is due. 19 See, e.g., Sect. 2254 Rule 1(b) (“The district court may apply any or all of these rules to a habeas 20 corpus petition not covered by” 28 U.S.C. § 2254); Clutchette v. Rushen, 770 F.2d 1469, 1474– 21 75 (9th Cir. 1985) (pursuant to Habeas Rule 4, the federal court has discretion to fix a time to file 22 an answer beyond the time periods set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2243). A court considering a habeas 23 24 1 corpus petition “shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show 2 cause why the writ should not be granted.” 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 3 Having reviewed the Petition, the Court ORDERS: 4 1. Service. If not previously accomplished, electronic posting of this Order and

5 Petitioner’s Petition shall effect service upon the United States Attorney of the Petition and any 6 supporting documents. Dkt. 1. Service upon the United States Attorney is deemed to be service 7 upon the Respondents. 8 2. On or before January 5, 2026, Respondents shall show cause why a writ of 9 habeas corpus should not be granted by filing a return as provided in 28 U.S.C. § 2243. As a part 10 of such return, Respondents shall address and submit evidence relevant to Petitioner’s allegation 11 that his detention is unlawful. Respondents shall file the return with the Clerk of Court and shall 12 serve a copy upon Petitioner. 13 3. Petitioner may file a traverse and response no later than January 12, 2026. 14 4. The Clerk shall note the matter as ready for the Court’s consideration on January

15 12, 2026. 16 5. Respondents shall not file a reply brief unless requested by the Court. 17 6. To expedite Respondents’ ability to file a Response to the Petition, Petitioner is 18 directed to share his “Alien Registration Number” (if known) with Respondents within 24 hours 19 of the filing of this Order. 20 7. To preserve the opportunity to determine whether the court has subject matter 21 jurisdiction and, if so, to consider whether habeas relief is warranted, a court may issue an order 22 to maintain the status quo. See United States v. United Mine Workers of Am., 330 U.S. 258, 293 23 (1947) (“[T]he District Court ha[s] the power to preserve existing conditions while it . . .

24 1 determine[s] its own authority to grant injunctive relief,” unless the assertion of jurisdiction is 2 frivolous.). This is particularly so when the order is necessary to prevent action that would 3 otherwise destroy the court’s jurisdiction or moot the case. United States v. Shipp, 203 U.S. 563, 4 573 (1906).

5 Accordingly, to allow Petitioner time to move for emergency relief in the event he is to 6 be transferred or removed before this Court reviews his Petition, the Court ORDERS that 7 Respondents must provide this Court, Petitioner, and Petitioner’s counsel in this habeas corpus 8 action, at least 48 hours’ notice (or 72 hours’ notice if the period extends into the weekend) prior 9 to any action to move or transfer him from the Northwest Immigration and Customs 10 Enforcement Processing Center or to remove him from the United States. 11 8. The parties have a right to consent to the undersigned Magistrate Judge. Consent 12 is voluntary. Counsel for the parties are directed to indicate whether they consent or decline 13 consent by no later than January 5, 2026, by emailing Deputy Kelly Miller at 14 kelly_miller@wawd.uscourts.gov. If the parties consent, the undersigned Magistrate Judge will

15 preside over the entire case through judgment. If the parties decline consent, the case will remain 16 assigned to District Judge Jones. 17 18 Dated this 17th day of December, 2025. 19 A 20 21 Grady J. Leupold United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24