Nery Godinez Sales v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.

S.D. California

Nery Godinez Sales v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.

District Court, S.D. California·Decided November 13, 2025·No. 3:25-cv-03125·Unknown

Opinion

NERY GODINEZ SALES, Case No. 25-cv-03125-BAS-BJW

Petitioner, ORDER: v. (1) REQUIRING THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND CENTER, et al., TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF Respondents. HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 1); AND (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (ECF No. 2)

On November 12, 2025, Petitioner Nery Godinez Sales filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) In his Petition, Petitioner claims that he is being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its associated regulations, as well as the Fifth Amendment. (Id.) In addition, Petitioner filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause. (ECF No. 2.) Petitioner asks the Court to require the Government to respond to the Petition within three days under the procedures set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds summary dismissal is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition. However, to promote the uniform treatment of similarly situated Section 2241 petitions challenging immigration custody, the Court finds appropriate to require the Government to respond to the Petition within seven days of order. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: l. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than November 2025. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the Petition and include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. 2. Petitioner may file a reply in support of his Petition no later than November 2025. 3. Given the Court’s briefing schedule, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Motion for Order to Show Cause. (ECF No. 2.) 4. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order. DATED: November 13, 2025 yatta Bahar Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 54 United States District Court

~_9_

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

NERY GODINEZ SALES, Case No. 25-cv-03125-BAS-BJW

Petitioner, ORDER: v. (1) REQUIRING THE GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND CENTER, et al., TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF Respondents. HABEAS CORPUS (ECF No. 1); AND (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE (ECF No. 2)

On November 12, 2025, Petitioner Nery Godinez Sales filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) In his Petition, Petitioner claims that he is being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its associated regulations, as well as the Fifth Amendment. (Id.) In addition, Petitioner filed a Motion for Order to Show Cause. (ECF No. 2.) Petitioner asks the Court to require the Government to respond to the Petition within three days under the procedures set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds summary dismissal is unwarranted at this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (“Summary dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the Court will order the Government to respond to the Petition. However, to promote the uniform treatment of similarly situated Section 2241 petitions challenging immigration custody, the Court finds appropriate to require the Government to respond to the Petition within seven days of order. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: l. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than November 2025. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the Petition and include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. 2. Petitioner may file a reply in support of his Petition no later than November 2025. 3. Given the Court’s briefing schedule, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART the Motion for Order to Show Cause. (ECF No. 2.) 4. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order. DATED: November 13, 2025 yatta Bahar Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge 54 United States District Court

~_9_

Nery Godinez Sales v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al., (S.D. Cal. 2025).

Pincite

Nery Godinez Sales v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al. (Nery Godinez Sales v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related