Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

1
26cv1152
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
TOWFIQ HEKMAT HEKMAT,
A249141221,
Petitioner,
v.
IMPERIAL REGIONAL DETENTION
FACILITY, et al.,
Respondents.
Case No. 26-cv-1152-BAS-SBC
ORDER:
(1) DENYING MOTION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA
PAUPERIS (ECF No. 2), AND
(2) REQUIRING PETITIONER
TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
PETITION SHOULD NOT BE
DISMISSED
Petitioner Towfiq Hekmat Hekmat, an immigration detainee housed at the Imperial
Regional Detention Center in Calexico, California, proceeding pro se, has filed a Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, accompanied by a Motion
proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 1–2.
A request to proceed in forma pauperis must include a completed affidavit with a
statement of all assets showing an inability to pay the $5.00 filing fee. See S.D. Cal. CivLR
3.2. The Southern District of California has a standardized application to proceed in forma
pauperis, which requires a detailed accounting of income and expenses signed by the
requestor. 	While Petitioner has submitted that form, it is entirely blank other than
Case 3:26-cv-01152-BAS-SBC Document 3 Filed 02/25/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
26cv1152
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
Petitioner’s signature, containing no financial information whatsoever. Petitioner has not
submitted a completed application with a statement of all assets in accordance with this
district’s application. 	Accordingly, the Court DENIES the request to proceed in forma
pauperis. (ECF No. 2.)
Because the Court cannot proceed until Petitioner has either paid the $5.00 filing fee
or has qualified to proceed in forma pauperis, this case is subject to dismissal without
prejudice. See S.D. Cal. CivLR 3.2; see also R. 1(b), 3(a), Rules Governing Section 2254
Cases (2019).
In addition, the Court has reviewed the Petition, and it is blank other than a few
boxes checked. (See ECF No. 1.) This means that even if Petitioner pays the $5.00 filing
fee, the Court does not have enough information for this case to proceed. See Kourteva v.
INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (noting a petition is subject to summary
dismissal if it is vague or conclusory).
Accordingly, Petitioner is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Petition should
not be dismissed for failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement or for failure to provide
sufficient allegations concerning Petitioner’s detention. To avoid dismissal of this habeas
case, Petitioner must, no later than March 18, 2026: (1) pay the $5.00 filing fee OR (2)
submit adequate proof of Petitioner’s inability to pay the fee. 	Further, Petitioner should
fill out a new petition form and provide as much information as possible, including
information about his immigration case and when he was detained by immigration
authorities. Otherwise, this case will be summarily dismissed for lack of sufficient
information.
For Petitioner’s convenience, the Clerk of Court shall attach to this Order (1) a blank
application to proceed in forma pauperis and (2) a blank petition for writ of habeas corpus
under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: February 25, 2026
Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge
United States District Court
Case 3:26-cv-01152-BAS-SBC Document 3 Filed 02/25/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2