Andrews

(HC) Diep v. Andrews

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 20251:24-cv-01238California3,442 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 VI KIET DIEP, ) Case No.: 1:24-cv-01238-SKO (HC) ) Petitioner, ) ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT’S MOTION ) TO DISMISS (Doc. 12), GRANTING PETITION ) FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS, AND ) DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO PROVIDE BOND v. ) HEARING BEFORE AN IMMIGRATION JUDGE ) WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS ) MINGA WOFFORD1, Facility Administrator, ) ) Respondents. )

) ) 19 Petitioner is an immigration detainee proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He is represented in this action by the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office. The parties having consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge, on October 28, 2024, 23

1 Respondent moves to dismiss all unlawfully named officials. As explained by the Supreme Court in Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 430 (2004), the proper respondent in habeas cases is the “warden of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.