3:26-cv-01255•Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable
Full text
1 3:26-cv-1255-CAB-DEB 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 SUNIT SUNIT, Petitioner, v. GREGORY ARCHAMBEAULT, et al., Respondents. Case No.: 3:26-cv-1255-CAB-DEB ORDER DISMISSING PETITION WITH LEAVE TO AMEND On February 27, 2026, Petitioner Sunit Sunit filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 2241, [Doc. No. 1 (“Petition”)], and a motion for temporary restraining order, [Doc. No. 2 (“TRO”)]. Petitioner is currently detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego, California, contends ICE is unlawfully detaining him. [Id. at 2.] The Court DISMISSES the petition with leave to amend because Petitioner did not name the proper respondent. When a habeas petitioner challenges his present physical confinement, he must name as respondent the warden of the facility where he is held. Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1194–95 (9th Cir. 2024); 28 U.S.C. § 2242. Here, because Petitioner failed to name his immediate custodian—the warden or de facto warden of Otay Mesa Detention Center—as respondent, the Court lacks jurisdiction over the Petition. Accordingly, the Petition is DISMISSED with leave to amend. Case 3:26-cv-01255-CAB-DEB Document 3 Filed 03/02/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2 3:26-cv-1255-CAB-DEB 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 If Petitioner wishes to proceed with this case, he must file a First Amended Petition within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The First Amended Petition shall name as the Respondent the person having immediate custody over Petitioner, namely the warden or de facto warden of the facility where he is detained. Moreover, Petitioner’s First Amended Petition must be complete in itself without reference to his original petition. Defendants not named and any claim not re-alleged in the First Amended Petition will be considered waived. See CivLR 15.1(a). It is SO ORDERED. Dated: March 2, 2026 Case 3:26-cv-01255-CAB-DEB Document 3 Filed 03/02/26 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.