3:25-cv-03713•Mateo v. Casey et al
Full text
1 25cv3713-LL-AHG 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 DANIEL NICOLAS MATEO, Petitioner, v. JEREMY CASEY, Warden of Imperial Regional Detention Facility; et al., Respondents. Case No.: 25cv3713-LL-AHG ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 2241 [ECF No. 1] Before the Court is Petitioner Daniel Nicolas Mateo’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1 (“Pet.”). Respondents filed a Return in which they acknowledge that (1) Petitioner is a member of the Bond Eligible Class certified in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-cv-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3288403 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025); (2) a final judgment has been entered as to the Bond Eligible Class; and (3) per the entry of final judgment, Petitioner is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and is entitled to an order from this Court directing a bond hearing be held pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). ECF No. 4; see also Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, / / / / / / / / / Case 3:25-cv-03713-LL-AHG Document 6 Filed 01/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2 25cv3713-LL-AHG 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 No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3678485, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025) (entering final judgment for members of the Bond Eligible Class).1 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows: 1. Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED.2 2. Respondents shall provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven (7) days of the date of this order. 3. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in Petitioner’s favor and close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: January 12, 2026 1 Subsequent to entry of judgment, the respondents in Maldonado Bautista filed a Notice of Appeal. However, the Ninth Circuit has held the filing of an appeal does not suspend the preclusive effect of a lower court judgment. Hawkins v. Risley, 984 F.2d 321, 324 (9th Cir. 1993) (citations omitted). 2 Petitioner requests attorney’s fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act [Pet. at 29], which the Court DENIES without prejudice. Case 3:25-cv-03713-LL-AHG Document 6 Filed 01/12/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.