Castro v. Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center

1 26-cv-1387-AGS-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
Alejandro DIEGO CASTRO,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN, Otay Mesa Detention Center,
Respondent.
Case No.: 26-cv-1387-AGS-DEB
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION
WITH LEAVE TO AMEND
Petitioner Alejandro Diego Castro seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 to free him from immigration detention. At this stage, he need only make out a
claim that is sufficiently cognizable to warrant an answer or return. See Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, Rule 4 (authorizing summary
dismissal “if it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner
is not entitled to relief”); id., Rule 1(b) (permitting application of Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases to any “habeas corpus petition”). In this context, the relevant federal rules
permit “summary dismissal of claims that are clearly not cognizable.” Neiss v. Bludworth,
114 F.4th 1038, 1045 (9th Cir. 2024) (cleaned up). But “as long as a petition has any
potential merit, it is not so frivolous or incredible as to justify summary dismissal[.]” Id.
Unfortunately for Diego Castro, his petition does not meet this low bar. He claims
to have been “detained on November 3, 2025, while purchasing gas at a gas station in San
Diego” and that he has remained “in custody despite having no federal charges filed against
him.” (ECF 1, at 1.) Other than that, the only facts in his petition are that he has “[s]trong
family ties in the United States” and claims to be “[n]o danger to the community and no
risk of flight” while he “is in the process of resolving his immigration matters.” (Id. at 2.)
But none of that on its own suggests he is “in custody in violation of the constitution or
law or treaties of the United States,” much less identifies any such violation. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241(c)(3).
Case 3:26-cv-01387-AGS-DEB Document 2 Filed 03/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2 26-cv-1387-AGS-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
So, the petition must be dismissed, but the Court grants Castro Diego leave to amend
to provide additional information and identify the violation he asserts makes his detention
unlawful. Any amended petition is due March 27, 2026.
Dated: March 6, 2026
___________________________
Hon. Andrew G. Schopler
United States District Judge
Case 3:26-cv-01387-AGS-DEB Document 2 Filed 03/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2