Kasim v. LaRose et al

1
3:25-cv-3673-CAB-MSB
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
ABDLJEBER ABUBEKER KASIM,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, et al.,
Respondents.
Case No.: 3:25-cv-3673-CAB-MSB
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
[Doc. No. 1]
Petitioner Abdljeber Abubeker Kasim filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. [Doc. No. 1 (“Petition”).] After Respondents acknowledged
that pursuant to the final judgment in Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, No. 5:25-CV-01873-
SSS-BFM, Petitioner was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), this Court ordered a bond
hearing pursuant to § 1226(a) and its associated regulations. 	[Doc. No. 6.] 	Petitioner
subsequently received a bond hearing on January 30, 2026. 	[Doc. No. 10.] 	The Judge
granted bond in the amount of $3,500, subject to alternatives to detention at the discretion
of the Department of Homeland Security. 	[Id.] 	Petitioner has filed no objection to the
outcome of the bond hearing. 1
1 And even if Petitioner had, the Ninth Circuit has explained that pursuing habeas review of an
immigration judge’s adverse bond determination before appealing to the BIA is “improper” and
Case 3:25-cv-03673-CAB-MSB Document 11 Filed 02/12/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 1 of 2

2
3:25-cv-3673-CAB-MSB
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
The Court therefore DISMISSES the case. The Clerk of the Court shall close the
case.
It is SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 12, 2026
Petitioner should “exhaust[] administrative remedies by appealing to the BIA before asking the federal
district court to review the IJ’s decision.” Leonardo v. Crawford, 646 F.3d 1157, 1160 (9th Cir. 2011).
Case 3:25-cv-03673-CAB-MSB Document 11 Filed 02/12/26 PageID.<pageID>
Page 2 of 2