Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al

W.D. Louisiana

Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al

DecidedJanuary 20, 2026

Docket1:25-cv-01672

StatusUnknown

This text of Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al (Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al, (W.D. La. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

a UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

MOHAMMAD ALI KHURAMI #A249- CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:25-CV-01672 384-401, SEC P Petitioner

VERSUS JUDGE EDWARDS

E GARCIA ET AL, MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES Respondents

MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1) filed by pro se Petitioner Mohammad Ali Khurami (“Khurami”), an immigration detainee at Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, Louisiana. Khurami challenges the legality of his continued detention. Because additional information is necessary to evaluate Khurami’s claim, he must AMEND the Petition. I. Background Khurami is a native and citizen of Afghanistan. ECF No. 1-2 at 2. He alleges that he was ordered removed to Brazil or Afghanistan on April 21, 2025. Khurami asserts that there is no substantial likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. II. Analysis The Constitution prohibits indefinite detention of immigration detainees. Accordingly, detention beyond the 90 day removal period is only allowed for a period reasonably necessary to bring about a detainee’s removal from the United States. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 701 (2001). Detention for up to six months is presumed reasonable. Jd. After six months, if a detainee provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing. The six-month presumption does not mean that every alien not removed must be released after six months. To the contrary, an alien may be held in confinement until it has been determined that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. See Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. Khurami does not allege reasons why his removal is unlikely to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future. Accordingly, he must amend the Petition. Ill. Conclusion Because additional information is needed to evaluate the Petition, IT IS ORDERED that Khurami AMEND the Petition within 30 days to state why there is no significant likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. SIGNED on Tuesday, January 20, 2026. TH JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

a UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

MOHAMMAD ALI KHURAMI #A249- CIVIL DOCKET NO. 1:25-CV-01672 384-401, SEC P Petitioner

VERSUS JUDGE EDWARDS

E GARCIA ET AL, MAGISTRATE JUDGE PEREZ-MONTES Respondents

MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1) filed by pro se Petitioner Mohammad Ali Khurami (“Khurami”), an immigration detainee at Winn Correctional Center in Winnfield, Louisiana. Khurami challenges the legality of his continued detention. Because additional information is necessary to evaluate Khurami’s claim, he must AMEND the Petition. I. Background Khurami is a native and citizen of Afghanistan. ECF No. 1-2 at 2. He alleges that he was ordered removed to Brazil or Afghanistan on April 21, 2025. Khurami asserts that there is no substantial likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. II. Analysis The Constitution prohibits indefinite detention of immigration detainees. Accordingly, detention beyond the 90 day removal period is only allowed for a period reasonably necessary to bring about a detainee’s removal from the United States. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 701 (2001). Detention for up to six months is presumed reasonable. Jd. After six months, if a detainee provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing. The six-month presumption does not mean that every alien not removed must be released after six months. To the contrary, an alien may be held in confinement until it has been determined that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. See Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. Khurami does not allege reasons why his removal is unlikely to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future. Accordingly, he must amend the Petition. Ill. Conclusion Because additional information is needed to evaluate the Petition, IT IS ORDERED that Khurami AMEND the Petition within 30 days to state why there is no significant likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. SIGNED on Tuesday, January 20, 2026. TH JOSEPH H.L. PEREZ-MONTES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Mohammad Ali Khurami v. E Garcia et al, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mohammad-ali-khurami-v-e-garcia-et-al-lawd-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack