Naim Vijdani v. John Mattos, et al.

Opinion

Naim Vijdani, Case No.: 2:25-cv-02496-GMN-EJY

Petitioner. Order

v.

John Mattos, et al.,

Respondents. Petitioner Naim Vijdani, immigration detainee, has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1-1. In its previous Order, the Court granted Vijdani’s request for appointment of counsel, instructed Vijdani to file an amended Petition, and instructed Vijdani to file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). ECF No. 3. Vijdani has timely complied, and the Court finds good cause exists to grant the IFP Application. Following a preliminary review of the amended Petition, the Court directs service of the Petition on Respondents and other interested parties. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the IFP Application, (ECF No. 4), is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is kindly directed to: 1. DELIVER a copy of the amended Petition (ECF No. 9) and this Order to the U.S. Marshal for service. 2. ADD the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada to the docket as an Interested Party. 3. SEND, through CM/ECF, a copy of the amended Petition (ECF No. 9) and this Order to the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada at Sigal.Chattah@usdoj.gov, Veronica.criste@usdoj.gov, Summer.johnson@usdoj.gov, and caseview.ecf@usdoj.gov, in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2)(E).

4. SEND, through CM/ECF, a copy of the amended Petition (ECF No. 9) and this Order to counsel for proper respondent John Mattos: Ashlee Hesman at ahesman@strucklove.com and Jacob Brady Lee at JLee@strucklove.com. 5. MAIL a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1-1) and this Order pursuant to Rule 4(i)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to: 1) Pamela Bondi, Attorney General of the United States, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20530 2) John Mattos, Warden, Nevada Southern Center, 2190 E. Mesquite Ave. Pahrump, NV 89060 3) Michael Bernacke, Salt Lake City ICE Field Office Director, 2975 Decker Lake Drive Suite 100, West Valley City, UT 84119-6096 4) Todd Lyons, Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 500 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20536 5) Kristi Noem, Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security, 245 Murray Lane SW, Washington, DC 20528 6) Kerri Ann Quihuis, 501 South Las Vegas Blvd., Suite 1000, Las Vegas, NV 89101

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal SERVE a copy of the amended Petition (ECF No. 9) and this Order on the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada or on an Assistant United States Attorney or clerical employee designated by the United State Attorney pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall not be transferred out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting the court’s “express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction”). Given the exigent circumstances, the Court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending resolution on the merits and finds that Petitioner has satisfied the factors governing the issuance of such preliminary relief. 1 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for Respondents file a notice of appearance within 7 days of the date of this Order and file and serve their response to the amended petition within 14 days of service, unless additional time is allowed for good cause shown. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents must file with their response any documents referenced or relied upon in their responsive pleading. If Respondents’ asserted basis 6 for detaining Petitioner is reflected in any documents in their possession, including, but not limited to, an arrest warrant, Notice to Appear, Form-286, and/or Form I-213 relevant to 8 Petitioner’s arrest, detention, and removal proceedings, Respondents must so indicate and file 9) said documents with their pleading. If no such documents exist to support the asserted basis for 10] detention, Respondents must indicate that in their response. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner will have 7 days following the filing of the response to file a reply. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties must meet and confer regarding any requests for an extension of deadlines and stipulate to the extension if possible. Any motion for extension must certify efforts taken to meet and confer and indicate the opposing party’s position 16] regarding the extension. Any motion or stipulation must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Local Rules IA 6-1, 6-2. DATED: — February 2, 2026

aa NAVARRO >] UNITt TATES DISTRICT JUDGE