Iglesias Parada v. Unknown Party et al

ORDER TRANSFERRING PETITION TO THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA - 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA
JOSE RODOLFO IGLESIAS PARADA,
Petitioner,
v.
WARDEN, NORTHWEST ICE
PROCESSING CENTER; FIELD OFFICE
DIRECTOR, ICE SEATTLE; SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
THE UNITED STATES,
Respondents.
Case No. 2:26-cv-00947-TMC
ORDER TRANSFERRING PETITION TO
THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Before the Court is self-represented petitioner Jose Rodolfo Iglesias Parada’s
(“Mr. Parada”) petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Dkt. 1. For these
reasons, the Court ORDERS that Mr. Parada’s petition be immediately transferred to the District
of Arizona.
On March 6, 2026, Respondents detained Mr. Parada and transferred him to the
Northwest ICE Processing Center (“NWIPC”) in Tacoma, Washington on March 8. Dkt. 7 at 1.
On March 17, the government transferred Mr. Parada again to Florence, Arizona, where he is
facing imminent removal. Dkt. 8 at 2. On March 20, the Court received Mr. Parada’s petition,
Case 2:26-cv-02086-SPL--ASB Document 10 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 2

ORDER TRANSFERRING PETITION TO THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA - 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
which appears to have been mailed from Baltimore on March 13. See Dkt. 7 p. 2. Importantly,
Mr. Parada was no longer detained in this District when his petition was filed.
The habeas statute permits the Court to grant writs of habeas corpus “within their
respective jurisdictions.” 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Habeas jurisdiction, generally, “lies in only one
district: the district of confinement.” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004). This Court
lacks jurisdiction over Mr. Parada’s petition as he was no longer confined in this District at the
time his petition was filed. Mr. Parada is now detained in Florence, Arizona, which is located in
the sole District of Arizona.
Respondents ask the Court to either dismiss or transfer Mr. Parada’s petition to a court
with jurisdiction over his current confinement. Dkt. 7 at 2. The Court finds that transfer is
appropriate here. Whenever a civil action is filed in a court that lacks jurisdiction, “the court
shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action” to a court “in which the action . . .
could have been brought at the time it was filed[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 1631. Transfer is in the interest
of justice because Mr. Parada faces imminent removal and dismissal would result in unnecessary
delay. Mr. Parada’s petition will “proceed as if it had been filed in . . . the court to which it is
transferred[.]” Id.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to immediately transfer this case to the
District of Arizona for all further proceedings. The clerk is also requested to close this case after
its transfer and send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to any party
appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.
Dated this 24th day of March, 2026.
Tiffany M. Cartwright
United States District Judge
Case 2:26-cv-02086-SPL--ASB Document 10 Filed 03/24/26 Page 2 of 2