Roberto Juarez Fernandez v. Jason Knight, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: November 25, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-02341
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 * * *

6 ROBERTO JUAREZ FERNANDEZ, Case No. 2:25-cv-02341-RFB-DJA

7 Petitioner, ORDER

8 v.

9 JASON KNIGHT, et al.,

10 Respondents.

11 12 Petitioner Roberto Juarez Fernandez, immigration detainee, has filed a counseled Petition 13 for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1) and Amended Motion for 14 Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 3), challenging his continued detention at Nevada 15 Southern Detention Center in the custody of Federal Respondents. The Court has reviewed the 16 Petition and Motion and preliminarily believes Petitioner likely can demonstrate that his 17 circumstances warrant the same relief as this Court ordered for Petitioners Mena-Vargas and 18 Reyes-Lopez in Escobar Salgado v. Mattos, No. 2:25-CV-01872-RFB-EJY, 2025 WL 3205356 19 (D. Nev. Nov. 17, 2025). 20 Thus, Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Motion and Writ should 21 not be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Respondents shall file, in writing, within three days, a (i) 22 notice of appearance and (ii) “a return certifying the true cause of detention” on or before 23 December 1, 2025. Id. Petitioner may file a traverse on or before December 3, 2025. 24 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court sets a hearing on the (ECF No. 1) Petition and 25 (ECF No. 3) Motion for December 5, 2025 at 9:00 A.M. in Las Vegas Courtroom 7C, before the 26 undersigned Judge. 27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Respondents have no new arguments to offer that have 28 not already been addressed by the Court, they may so indicate by reference to their previous 1 briefing, while reserving appellate rights. They may not, however, incorporate briefing in a manner 2 that would circumvent the page limits under Local Rule 7-3 without leave. Respondents should 3 file the referenced briefing as an attachment for Petitioner’s counsel’s review. 4 Additionally, the Court finds Petitioner has established a prima facie case for relief and 5 that ordering Respondents to produce documents reflecting the basis for their detention of 6 Petitioner is necessary for the Court to “dispose of the matter as law and justice require.” See 7 Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290 (1969) (holding that “a district court, confronted by a petition 8 for habeas corpus which establishes a prima facie case for relief, may use or authorize the use of 9 suitable discovery procedures . . . reasonably fashioned to elicit facts necessary to help the court 10 to ‘dispose of the matter as law and justice require.’”) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2243). Therefore, IT IS 11 FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents must file with their return any documents referenced 12 or relied upon in their responsive pleading. If Respondents’ asserted basis for detention is reflected 13 in any documents in their possession which have not been provided to Petitioner, including, but 14 not limited to, an arrest warrant and/or Form-286, Respondents must so indicate and file said 15 documents with their pleading. If no such documents exist to support the asserted basis for 16 detention, Respondents must indicate that in their return. 17 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Local Rules 7-2, 7-3, and 7-4 will govern the 18 requirements and scheduling of all other motions filed by either party. 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file all documents and exhibits in 20 accordance with Local Rules LR IA 10-1 through 10-5. 21 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties must meet and confer regarding any requests 22 for an extension of time or continuance and must stipulate to the extension if possible. Any motion 23 for extension must certify efforts taken to meet and confer and indicate the opposing party’s 24 position regarding the extension. Any motion or stipulation must comply with Federal Rule of 25 Civil Procedure 6(b) and Local Rules IA 6-1, 6-2. 26 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall not transfer Petitioner out of this 27 District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting the court's "express 28 authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to 1 protect its own jurisdiction"); see also Al Otro Lado v. Wolf, 952 F.3d 999, 1007 n.6 (9th Cir. 2 2020) (“Having concluded that [agency action] would interfere with the court’s jurisdiction . . . , 3 the district court properly issued an injunction under the All Writs Act.”) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 4 1651(a)). Because transferring Petitioner outside of the District of Nevada would interfere with 5 this Court’s jurisdiction over Petitioner’s habeas challenge to the lawfulness of his detention, the 6 Court finds that this Order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending resolution on the merits 7 and finds that Petitioner has satisfied the factors governing the issuance of such preliminary relief. 8 IT IS FURTHER KINDLY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court: 9 1. DELIVER a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1), Amended Motion (ECF No. 3) and this 10 Order to the U.S. Marshal for service. 11 2. ADD the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada to the docket as an Interested 12 Party. 13 3. SEND, through CM/ECF, a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1), Amended Motion (ECF 14 No. 3) and this Order to the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada at 15 Sigal.Chattah@usdoj.gov, Veronica.criste@usdoj.gov, summer.johnson@usdoj.gov, and 16 caseview.ecf@usdoj.gov. in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2)(E). 17 4. MAIL a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1), Amended Motion (ECF No. 3) and this Order 18 pursuant to Rule 4(i)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to: 19 1) Kristi Noem, Secretary, United States Department of Homeland 20 Security, 245 Murray Lane SW, Washington, DC 20528 21 2) Pamela Bondi, Attorney General of the United States, 950 Pennsylvania 22 Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20530 23 3) Jason Knight, Acting Las Vegas Field Office Director, 2975 Decker 24 Lake Drive Suite 100, West Valley City, UT 84119-6096 25 4) John Mattos, Warden, Nevada Southern Center, 2190 E. Mesquite Ave. 26 Pahrump, NV 89060 27 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the U.S. Marshal SERVE a copy of the Petition (ECF 28 No. 1), Amended Motion (ECF No. 3) and this Order on the United States Attorney for the District 1 | of Nevada or on an Assistant United States Attorney or clerical employee designated by the United States Attorney pursuant to Rule 4(i)(1)(A)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 3 DATED: November 25, 2025. 4 AS 6 RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-4-