Wilmar Eduardo Ramos Ixcotoyac v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

District Court, S.D. California·Decided January 29, 2026·No. 3:26-cv-00482·Unknown

Opinion

I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Wilmar Eduardo RAMOS IXCOTOYAC, Case No.: 26-cv-0482-AGS-DDL Petitioner,’ QRDER DISMISSING PETITION WITHOUT PREJUDICE U.S. IMMIGRATION and CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE), Respondent. Petitioner Wilmar Ramos Ixcotoyac seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to free him from immigration detention. But his petition fails to name the proper respondent. Petitions for habeas corpus must name as a respondent “the person who has custody over” the petitioner. “T]he default rule is that the proper respondent is the warden of the facility where the prisoner is being held[.]” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004); see also Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1199 (9th Cir. 2024) (“affirm[ing] the application of the immediate custodian” rule to “habeas petitions filed pursuant to 28 /U.S.C. § 2241, including those filed by immigrant detainees” and ruling a district court cannot consider a misnamed petition). Ramos Ixcotoyac only names “U.S. Immigration /and Customs Enforcement (ICE)” as a respondent. (ECF 1, at 1.) So, the petition must be dismissed, but Ramos Ixcotoyac may file an amended petition remedying that defect. Any amended petition is due February 23, 2026. Dated: January 29, 2026

Hon. rew G. Schopler United States District Judge ]

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

Wilmar Eduardo Ramos Ixcotoyac v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), (S.D. Cal. 2026).

Wilmar Eduardo Ramos Ixcotoyac v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (Wilmar Eduardo Ramos Ixcotoyac v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rumsfeld v. Padilla
542 U.S. 426 (Supreme Court, 2004)
John Doe v. Merrick Garland
109 F.4th 1188 (Ninth Circuit, 2024)