1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * 7 JOSE MARTINEZ RIOS, 8 Petitioner, 9 v. Case No. 2:26-cv-01522-RFB-EJY 10 JOHN MATTOS, et al., ORDER 11 Respondents. 12 13 Petitioner Jose Martinez Rios, an immigration detainee, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ 14 of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1). He challenges the lawfulness of his 15 ongoing detention at Nevada Southern Detention Center in the custody of Immigration and 16 Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). He asserts he is a member of the certified class in Jacobo Ramirez 17 v. Noem,1 --- F.Supp.3d ---, No. 2:25-CV-02136-RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 310090 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 18 2026) (“Class Member”). Therefore, he may be entitled to relief pursuant to the Court’s grant of 19 partial summary judgment to Class Members. See Jacobo Ramirez v. Mullin, No. 2:25-cv-02136- 20 RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 879799 (D. Nev. Mar. 30, 2026). 21 22 I. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 23 By statute, this Court has the discretion to appoint counsel for indigent habeas corpus 24 petitioners when “the interests of justice so require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2); see also Hill v. 25 Lizarraga, 731 Fed.Appx. 686, 687 n.2 (9th Cir. 2018); Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 26 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3006A). That standard is satisfied here, as this case 27 1 Kristi Noem has since been substituted for Respondent Markwayne Mullin, the current 28 Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 1 necessarily implicates a complex web of detention authority developed specifically for 2 noncitizens. See Torres v. Barr, 976 F.3d 918, 924 (9th Cir. 2020) (describing the Immigration and 3 Nationality Act as: a “morass;” a “Gordian know;” and “King Minos’s labyrinth in ancient Crete”) 4 (citations omitted). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Federal Public Defender for the 5 United States District of Nevada (“FPD”) is APPOINTED to represent Petitioner. The Clerk of 6 Court is kindly instructed to ADD the FPD to the docket as an “Attorney to be Noticed” using the 7 following email address: ecf_nvchu@fd.org. The Clerk is further instructed to SEND a copy of 8 this Order to the FPD and CJA Coordinator for this division. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the 9 FPD must FILE a notice of appearance, or ADVISE the Court that it cannot represent Petitioner, 10 by May 21, 2026. Appointed counsel will represent Petitioner in all federal proceedings related to 11 this matter, including any appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless appointed counsel is allowed 12 to withdraw. 13 14 II. DOCUMENT PRODUCTION 15 This Court has the express authority to “use[,] or authorize the use[,] of suitable discovery 16 procedures” to dispose of a viable habeas petition “as law and justice require.” Harris v. Nelson, 17 394 U.S. 286, 290 (1969) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2243); cf. also Rule 6(b), Rules Governing Section 18 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (empowering a court to authorize discovery in 19 habeas corpus proceedings for “good cause”); id. at Rule 1(b) (enabling a court to apply these rules 20 to petitions brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241). Indeed, it is “the inescapable obligation of the courts” 21 to vindicate their “habeas corpus jurisdiction” by fashioning “methods for securing facts where 22 necessary.” Harris, 394 U.S. at 299. In short, “the power of inquiry on federal habeas corpus is 23 plenary.” Id. at 292 (citing Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 321 (1963)). Here, the Court finds 24 that Petitioner has established a prima facie case for class-relief. But, since Petitioner is presently 25 detained, he lacks the ability to adequately develop his claim(s) in the absence of records that are 26 in Federal Respondents’ custody and control. Cf. id. at 291 (“And this Court has emphasized . . . 27 the fact that the petitioner, being in custody, is usually handicapped in developing the evidence 28 needed to support in necessary detail the facts alleged in [their] petition[.]”). Thus, the Court 1 concludes limited discovery is necessary to properly dispose of this matter. 2 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Federal Respondents must PRODUCE the 3 following records, which are relevant to the lawfulness of Petitioner’s detention: (1) I-200 Warrant 4 for Arrest of Alien; (2) Form I-286 Initial Custody Determination; (3) Form I-862 Notice to 5 Appear; (4) Form I-213 Record of Deportable or Inadmissible Alien; (5) all immigration court 6 orders in Petitioner’s removal proceedings or custody redetermination proceedings; (6) documents 7 reflecting any appeal of any immigration court orders by the Department of Homeland Security or 8 Petitioner; (7) transcripts and/or audio recordings of any custody redetermination proceedings. 9 Specifically, Federal Respondents must PRODUCE these materials to Petitioner’s Counsel by 10 May 22, 2026. Alternatively, by that same date, Respondents must CERTIFY that, after a diligent 11 search, they have determined that the record(s) are not in their possession, custody, or control. 12 13 III. BRIEFING 14 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the following parameters will govern in this case. See Rule 15 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (“[T]he judge must 16 order the respondent to file an answer, motion, or other response within a fixed time, or to take 17 other action the judge may order.”): 18 A. Schedule 19 i. Notice Regarding Class Membership: On or before May 26, 2026, Federal 20 Respondents must file a notice which indicates whether they contend Petitioner 21 is, or is not, a Jacobo-Ramirez Class Member. See Jacobo Ramirez v. Mullin, No. 22 2:25-cv-02136-RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 879799, at *33 (D. Nev. Mar. 30, 2026) 23 (“‘Class Members’ are: All noncitizens in the U.S. without lawful status (1) who 24 are or will be arrested or detained by ICE; (2) who are or will be in removal 25 proceedings before an Immigration Court within the District of Nevada; (3) 26 whom DHS alleges or will allege to have entered the United States without 27 inspection or parole; (4) who are not or will not be subject to detention under 28 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226(c), 1225(b)(1), or 1231 at the time they are scheduled for or 1 request a bond hearing; and (5) whose most recent arrest by ICE occurred inside 2 the United States and not while arriving in the United States.”). Federal 3 Respondents shall file the following documents with the Notice: (1) Form I-862 4 Notice to Appear and (2) Form I-213 Record of Deportable or Inadmissible Alien. 5 ii. Amended Petition: On or before May 29, 2026, Petitioner must file an amended 6 petition for a writ of habeas corpus unless the FPD declines to represent 7 Petitioner.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 * * * 7 JOSE MARTINEZ RIOS, 8 Petitioner, 9 v. Case No. 2:26-cv-01522-RFB-EJY 10 JOHN MATTOS, et al., ORDER 11 Respondents. 12 13 Petitioner Jose Martinez Rios, an immigration detainee, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ 14 of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1). He challenges the lawfulness of his 15 ongoing detention at Nevada Southern Detention Center in the custody of Immigration and 16 Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). He asserts he is a member of the certified class in Jacobo Ramirez 17 v. Noem,1 --- F.Supp.3d ---, No. 2:25-CV-02136-RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 310090 (D. Nev. Feb. 5, 18 2026) (“Class Member”). Therefore, he may be entitled to relief pursuant to the Court’s grant of 19 partial summary judgment to Class Members. See Jacobo Ramirez v. Mullin, No. 2:25-cv-02136- 20 RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 879799 (D. Nev. Mar. 30, 2026). 21 22 I. APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL 23 By statute, this Court has the discretion to appoint counsel for indigent habeas corpus 24 petitioners when “the interests of justice so require.” 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2); see also Hill v. 25 Lizarraga, 731 Fed.Appx. 686, 687 n.2 (9th Cir. 2018); Chaney v. Lewis, 801 F.2d 1191, 1196 26 (9th Cir. 1986) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3006A). That standard is satisfied here, as this case 27 1 Kristi Noem has since been substituted for Respondent Markwayne Mullin, the current 28 Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d). 1 necessarily implicates a complex web of detention authority developed specifically for 2 noncitizens. See Torres v. Barr, 976 F.3d 918, 924 (9th Cir. 2020) (describing the Immigration and 3 Nationality Act as: a “morass;” a “Gordian know;” and “King Minos’s labyrinth in ancient Crete”) 4 (citations omitted). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Federal Public Defender for the 5 United States District of Nevada (“FPD”) is APPOINTED to represent Petitioner. The Clerk of 6 Court is kindly instructed to ADD the FPD to the docket as an “Attorney to be Noticed” using the 7 following email address: ecf_nvchu@fd.org. The Clerk is further instructed to SEND a copy of 8 this Order to the FPD and CJA Coordinator for this division. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the 9 FPD must FILE a notice of appearance, or ADVISE the Court that it cannot represent Petitioner, 10 by May 21, 2026. Appointed counsel will represent Petitioner in all federal proceedings related to 11 this matter, including any appeals or certiorari proceedings, unless appointed counsel is allowed 12 to withdraw. 13 14 II. DOCUMENT PRODUCTION 15 This Court has the express authority to “use[,] or authorize the use[,] of suitable discovery 16 procedures” to dispose of a viable habeas petition “as law and justice require.” Harris v. Nelson, 17 394 U.S. 286, 290 (1969) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2243); cf. also Rule 6(b), Rules Governing Section 18 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (empowering a court to authorize discovery in 19 habeas corpus proceedings for “good cause”); id. at Rule 1(b) (enabling a court to apply these rules 20 to petitions brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2241). Indeed, it is “the inescapable obligation of the courts” 21 to vindicate their “habeas corpus jurisdiction” by fashioning “methods for securing facts where 22 necessary.” Harris, 394 U.S. at 299. In short, “the power of inquiry on federal habeas corpus is 23 plenary.” Id. at 292 (citing Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293, 321 (1963)). Here, the Court finds 24 that Petitioner has established a prima facie case for class-relief. But, since Petitioner is presently 25 detained, he lacks the ability to adequately develop his claim(s) in the absence of records that are 26 in Federal Respondents’ custody and control. Cf. id. at 291 (“And this Court has emphasized . . . 27 the fact that the petitioner, being in custody, is usually handicapped in developing the evidence 28 needed to support in necessary detail the facts alleged in [their] petition[.]”). Thus, the Court 1 concludes limited discovery is necessary to properly dispose of this matter. 2 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Federal Respondents must PRODUCE the 3 following records, which are relevant to the lawfulness of Petitioner’s detention: (1) I-200 Warrant 4 for Arrest of Alien; (2) Form I-286 Initial Custody Determination; (3) Form I-862 Notice to 5 Appear; (4) Form I-213 Record of Deportable or Inadmissible Alien; (5) all immigration court 6 orders in Petitioner’s removal proceedings or custody redetermination proceedings; (6) documents 7 reflecting any appeal of any immigration court orders by the Department of Homeland Security or 8 Petitioner; (7) transcripts and/or audio recordings of any custody redetermination proceedings. 9 Specifically, Federal Respondents must PRODUCE these materials to Petitioner’s Counsel by 10 May 22, 2026. Alternatively, by that same date, Respondents must CERTIFY that, after a diligent 11 search, they have determined that the record(s) are not in their possession, custody, or control. 12 13 III. BRIEFING 14 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the following parameters will govern in this case. See Rule 15 4, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts (“[T]he judge must 16 order the respondent to file an answer, motion, or other response within a fixed time, or to take 17 other action the judge may order.”): 18 A. Schedule 19 i. Notice Regarding Class Membership: On or before May 26, 2026, Federal 20 Respondents must file a notice which indicates whether they contend Petitioner 21 is, or is not, a Jacobo-Ramirez Class Member. See Jacobo Ramirez v. Mullin, No. 22 2:25-cv-02136-RFB-MDC, 2026 WL 879799, at *33 (D. Nev. Mar. 30, 2026) 23 (“‘Class Members’ are: All noncitizens in the U.S. without lawful status (1) who 24 are or will be arrested or detained by ICE; (2) who are or will be in removal 25 proceedings before an Immigration Court within the District of Nevada; (3) 26 whom DHS alleges or will allege to have entered the United States without 27 inspection or parole; (4) who are not or will not be subject to detention under 28 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226(c), 1225(b)(1), or 1231 at the time they are scheduled for or 1 request a bond hearing; and (5) whose most recent arrest by ICE occurred inside 2 the United States and not while arriving in the United States.”). Federal 3 Respondents shall file the following documents with the Notice: (1) Form I-862 4 Notice to Appear and (2) Form I-213 Record of Deportable or Inadmissible Alien. 5 ii. Amended Petition: On or before May 29, 2026, Petitioner must file an amended 6 petition for a writ of habeas corpus unless the FPD declines to represent 7 Petitioner. Upon reviewing the amended petition, the Court will issue an order to 8 show cause, set a briefing schedule, or dismiss the petition as meritless. See 9 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 10 B. Filings 11 i. Local Rules 7-2, 7-3, and 7-4 will govern the requirements and scheduling of all 12 other motions filed by either party. 13 ii. The Parties shall file all documents and exhibits in accordance with Local Rules 14 LR IA 10-1 through 10-5. 15 iii. The Parties must meet and confer regarding any requests for an extension of 16 deadlines and stipulate to the extension if possible. Any motion for an extension 17 must certify efforts taken to meet and confer and indicate the opposing party’s 18 position regarding the extension. Any motion, or stipulation, must comply with 19 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Local Rules IA 6-1, 6-2. 20 iv. The Parties must refrain from including—or must partially redact, where 21 inclusion is necessary—personal-data identifiers from all documents filed with 22 the Court, unless the Court orders otherwise. See LR IC 6-1; see also Fed. R. Civ. 23 P.5.2. 24 25 IV. PRESERVATION OF JURISDICTION 26 To preserve the Court’s jurisdiction pending a ruling on the Petition, IT IS HEREBY 27 ORDERED that Respondents shall not remove Petitioner from the United States District of 28 Nevada, absent leave of Court. This Court has “express authority under the All Writs Act to issue 1 | such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction.” F.T.C. v. Dean 2| Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 608 (1966); Al Otro Lado v. Wolf, 952 F.3d 999, 1007 n.6 (9th Cir. 2020) (“Having concluded that [agency action] would interfere with the court’s jurisdiction ... , 4| the district court properly issued an injunction under the All Writs Act.”) (citing 28 U.S.C. 5 | § 1651(a)). Such an injunction is appropriate here. The Supreme Court of the United States has 6 | repeatedly held that only one district has jurisdiction over a “core habeas petition:” “the district of 7 | confinement.” Trump v. J.G.G., 604 U.S. 670, 672 (2025) (citing Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 US. 8 | 426, 443 (2004)). Therefore, the Court finds Petitioner’s removal from this judicial district could 9 | interfere with the Court's jurisdiction and ability to expeditiously resolve this case and provide 10 | appropriate relief. The Court thus finds this Order is warranted to maintain the status quo while 11 | the Court adjudicates the Petition. 12 13 V. SERVICE 14 The Clerk of Court is kindly INSTRUCTED to: 15 1. ADD the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada to the docket as an 16 Interested Party. Pursuant to the District of Nevada’s General Order 2026-03 (Feb 17 13, 2026), this constitutes service on all federal respondents under Federal Rule of 18 Civil Procedure 4 and 28 U.S.C. § 2243. 19 2. SEND, through CM/ECF, a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1), and this Order, to 20 Counsel for Respondent John Mattos at ahesman@strucklove.com. 21 3. MAIL acopy of the Petition (ECF No. 1), and this Order, pursuant to Rule 4(1)(2) o: 22 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to John Mattos at Nevada Southern 23 Detention Center, 2190 E. Mesquite Ave., Pahrump, NV 89060. 24 25 DATED: May 19, 2026.
CVD 28 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, I UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
_5-