Minh Kai v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center

1
3:25-cv-3611-CAB-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
CAO LE MINH KHAI,
Petitioner,
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
Respondent.
Case No.: 3:25-cv-3611-CAB-AHG
ORDER DISMISSING HABEAS
PETITION
Before the Court is Petitioner Cao Le Minh Khai’s petition for writ of habeas corpus
(“Petition”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 	[Doc. No. 1.] 	Petitioner previously filed a
motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”), [Doc. No. 2], which the Court denied for lack
of necessary financial information. [Doc. No. 3.] Petitioner has paid the $5.00 filing fee;
the Court may now adjudicate his Petition.
In its previous order, the Court noted that even if it granted the IFP application, “the
current Petition is deficient because it fails to name the warden of the facility where
Petitioner is detained.” [Id. at 2.] Petitioner has failed to amend his Petition to name the
warden. He only lists the Attorney General of the State of California. Habeas petitioners
“challenging their present physical confinement [must] name their immediate custodian,
the warden of the facility where they are detained, as the respondent to their petition.” Doe
Case 3:25-cv-03611-CAB-AHG Document 5 Filed 01/23/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
3:25-cv-3611-CAB-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
v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1197 (9th Cir. 2024). 	Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES
the petition with leave to amend.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 23, 2026
Case 3:25-cv-03611-CAB-AHG Document 5 Filed 01/23/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2