Fofana v. Casey et al

1
26-cv-0506-JES-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
IDJOU FOFANA,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER LAROSE, Warden of
the Otay Mesa Detention Center;
GREGORY ARCHAMBEAULT,
Director of the San Diego Field Office,
United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; PAM BONDI, Attorney
General, United States Department of
Justice; KRISTI NOEM, Secretary,
United States Department of Homeland
Security; TODD LYONS, Acting Director
of United States Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; and DOES 1-5,
Respondents.
Case No.: 26-cv-0506-JES-DEB
ORDER FOR BOND HEARING
[ECF No. 1]
Before the Court is Petitioner Idjou Fofana’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”), filed on January 26, 2026. ECF No. 1.
Respondents responded to the Petition on February 2, 2026 (ECF No. 4), and Petitioner
filed a notice of concurrence on the same day (ECF No. 5).
Case 3:26-cv-00506-JES-DEB Document 6 Filed 02/03/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
26-cv-0506-JES-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
The parties agree that Petitioner is entitled an order for a bond hearing from this
Court. ECF Nos. 1 at 11; 4 at 2; 5 at 1. The Court notes that while Respondents state that
Petitioner is part of the Bond Eligible class in Maldonado Bautista, at least one court has
disagreed. See Xie, 2026 WL 92066, at *1–2 (finding that petitioner who had previously
been apprehended upon arrival and released on conditional parole was not part of the class).
Regardless, however, the Court does agree with Respondents that Petitioner’s re-detention
is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226 rather than § 1225, irrespective of and independently from
Maldonado Bautista. The Court has previously held that where a petitioner is apprehended
at the border, paroled into the country, and had been residing in the country when he was
re-detained, his detention is governed by § 1226. See, e.g., Martinez Lopez v. Noem et al.,
No: 25-cv-2717-JES-AHG, 2025 WL 3030457, at *4-5 (S.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2025)
(explaining reasoning and citing cases); Beltran et al. v. Noem et al., No. 25CV2650-LL-
DEB, 2025 WL 3078837, at *3-4 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2025) (holding same); Garcia, 2026
WL 194745, at *2 (same).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Respondents to provide Petitioner with a bond
determination hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within ten days of this Order. At the
hearing, Respondents may not deny Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained under
8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). Respondents are ORDERED to File a Notice of Compliance within
five days of providing Petitioner with a bond redetermination hearing, including apprising
the Court of the results of the hearing.
Because the requested relief is granted, the Court DENIES the remainder of
Petitioner’s claims as moot. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 3, 2026
Case 3:26-cv-00506-JES-DEB Document 6 Filed 02/03/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2