3:26-cv-05749•Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable
Full text
1 26-cv-5749-BJC-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 RAYMUNDO PEREZ PEREZ, Petitioner, v. PATRICK DIVVER, et al., Respondents. Case No.: 26-cv-5749-BJC-MMP ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND APPOINTING COUNSEL [ECF No. 1] On October 7, 2026, Petitioner Raymundo Perez Perez, proceeding pro se, filed a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1. After a review of the petition, this Court deems it appropriate to require Respondents to file a response, and finds that representation is necessary given the complexity and potential validity of the constitutional, statutory, and procedural issues presented. Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Additionally, the Court finds a limited stay is necessary to preserve the status quo to allow the Court to provide a reasoned decision on the pending application. See E-C-R- v. Noem, No. 3:25-CV-1230-SI, 2025 WL 2300543, at *1 (D. Or. July 16, 2025) (finding an order under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, necessary to prevent the arrest, detention or deportation of the plaintiff while the parties litigate the merits of the plaintiff’s motion for injunctive relief); Du v. United States Dep’t of Case 3:26-cv-05749-BJC-MMP Document 3 Filed 10/09/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2 26-cv-5749-BJC-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 Homeland Sec., No. 3:25-CV-644 (OAW), 2025 WL 1317944, at *2 (D. Conn. Apr. 24, 2025) (enjoining the defendants, under the All Writs Act, from removing the plaintiffs from the District of Connecticut to preserve the court’s jurisdiction). Based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS: 1. Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. is CONDITIONALLY APPOINTED as counsel effectively immediately. 4. Petitioner may file either an amended petition or a status report recommending against appointment no later than close of business on October 16, 2026. 5. Respondents shall file a response to the petition no later than close of business of October 23, 2026. Respondents shall include copies of all pertinent documents, orders, and transcripts relevant to this petition. 6. Petitioner may file a traverse, no later than close of business October 30, 2026. Absent further order of this Court, this matter will be deemed under submission at that time. 7. Respondents, their agents, employees, successors, attorneys, and all persons acting in active concert or participation with them are hereby ENJOINED from removing Petitioner from the United States or this District pending further order of the Court, to maintain the status quo to allow the Court to provide a reasoned decision to the request at hand. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 9, 2026 Case 3:26-cv-05749-BJC-MMP Document 3 Filed 10/09/26 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.