Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

1
26cv1624-CAB (MMP)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
NOUNAGNON THOMAS AYIDEDJI,
Petitioner,
v.
JEREMY CASEY, Warden,
Respondent.
Case No.: 3:26-cv-1624-CAB-MMP
ORDER:
(1) GRANTING MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS;
AND
(2) ORDERING RESPONSE
Petitioner Nounagnon Thomas Ayidedji, an immigration detainee proceeding pro
se1, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 	[Doc.
No. 1 (“Petition”).] Petitioner has also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in which
he attests he has no means to pay the $5.00 filing fee. [Doc. No. 2.] The Court GRANTS
Petitioner’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk shall file the Petition
without prepayment of the filing fee.
1 Petitioner may be interested in contacting Federal Defenders of San Diego to see if a Federal Defender
can represent Petitioner in this matter. The telephone number for Federal Defenders’ San Diego Office
is 619-234-8467 (Toll Free: 888-614-9867) and the El Centro Office is 760-335-3510 (Toll Free: 877-
404-9063).
Case 3:26-cv-01624-CAB-MMP Document 4 Filed 03/17/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
26cv1624-CAB (MMP)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Additionally, having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds summary dismissal is
unwarranted at this tine. 	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.”).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1. 	Respondent shall file a response to the Petition by March 24, 2026. The
response must address the allegations in the Petition and must include any documents
relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition.
2. 	Respondent shall serve a copy of the response on Petitioner by March 26,
2026.
3. 	Petitioner may file a reply by April 2, 2026.
4. 	To maintain the status quo, Respondent, his officers, agents, servants,
employees, 	attorneys, 	and 	other persons 	who 	act 	in 	concert 	or participation 	with
Respondent SHALL NOT transfer Petitioner outside of the Southern District of California
pending the Court’s resolution of the Petition.2
5. 	The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s
Office with a copy of the Petition and this Order.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 17, 2026
2 See Doe v. Bondi, Case No. 3:25-cv-805-BJC-JLB, 2025 WL 1870979, at *1 (S.D. Cal. June 11, 2025)
(“Federal courts retain jurisdiction to preserve the status quo while determining whether [they have]
subject matter jurisdiction over a case and while a petition is pending resolution from the court.”)
(collecting cases).
Case 3:26-cv-01624-CAB-MMP Document 4 Filed 03/17/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2