Southern District of California • 3:26-cv-01729

#1

Mar 18, 2026

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus against Pamela Bondi, Christopher LaRose, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem, Sirce Owen, Jesus Rocha ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number 167945.), filed by Alireza Hedayat. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Letter, # 3 Exhibit - Addendum 2 (pg. 42-46), # 4 Exhibit - Addendum 3 (pg. 47), # 5 Exhibit - Addendum 4-7 (pg. 48- 51), # 6 Exhibit - Addendum 8 (pg. 52-58), # 7 Exhibit - Addendum 9 (pg. 59- 66), # 8 Exhibit - Addendum 10 (pg. 67- 70), # 9 Exhibit - Addendum 11 (pg. 71-83), # 10 Exhibit - Addendum 12-13 (pg. 84-86), # 11 Exhibit - Addendum 14 (pg. 87-103), # 12 Receipt)The new case number is 3:26-cv-1729-JO-DDL. Judge Jinsook Ohta and Magistrate Judge David D. Leshner are assigned to the case.(ggv) (Entered: 03/19/2026)

#2

Mar 18, 2026

MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Alireza Hedayat. (ggv) (Entered: 03/19/2026)

#3

Mar 18, 2026

MOTION to Appoint Counsel by Alireza Hedayat. (ggv) (Entered: 03/19/2026)

#4

Mar 20, 2026

Minute Order by Judge Jinsook Ohta: The Court adopts with the following modification the Standard Procedures for Immigration Habeas Petitions from Chief Judge Order No. 144, available on the court's website: Any optional reply will be due 7 days after the government's opposition. Further, the Court sets a hearing on the Petition for April 9, 2026 at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 4C. All parties may appear by videoconference for the hearing. The courtroom deputy will provide the videoconference information ahead of the hearing, which will proceed unless the Court issues a written decision on the merits ahead of the hearing date. Parties are directed to check the docket at 5:00 PM the day before the hearing. Signed by Judge Jinsook Ohta on 03/20/2026. (rh) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (rxc). (Entered: 03/20/2026)

Mar 20, 2026

Minute Order (No Time) AND ~Util - Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

#5

Mar 26, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#6

Mar 26, 2026

Return to Petition for Writ of H/C

#7

Mar 26, 2026

Certificate of Service

#8

Mar 31, 2026

Order

#9

Mar 31, 2026

Appoint Counsel

#10

Apr 02, 2026

Minute Order by Judge Jinsook Ohta: Pro se petitioner H.A., an Iranian citizen who came to the United States to seek asylum, seeks habeas relief from his prolonged detention following a final removal order. See Dkt. 1 ("Pet."). For the reasons stated below, the Court GRANTS the habeas petition.1. On March 24, 2025, an Immigration Judge ("IJ") denied Petitioner's asylum application and other requests for relief and ordered Petitioner removed. Pet. at 9; Dkt. 1-5 at 1. On August 8, 2025, the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision, and the removal order became final. Pet. at 9. On November 18, 2025, the Ninth Circuit stayed Petitioner's removal pending further order of the court. Dkt. 1-5 at 3. Throughout these proceedings, Petitioner has remained detained at the Otay Mesa Detention Center.2. For the reasons stated in Pacheco v. LaRose, No. 3:25-CV-2421-JO-AHG, 2026 WL 242300, *2-*3 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2026), the Court finds that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) does not bar Petitioner's collateral challenge to the constitutionality of his current detention. As courts have consistently found, a challenge to continued detention pending removal does not intrude on the government's discretion to decide "when" or "whether" to execute a removal order and falls outside § 1252(g)'s scope. See Phakeokoth v. Noem, No. 3:25-cv-02817-RBM-SBC, 2025 WL 3124341, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2025); Esmaeili v. Noem, No. 26-CV-0203-GPC-JLB, 2026 WL 240661 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2026).3. The Court finds that Petitioner's continued detention violates his substantive due process rights under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 701 (2001) (after the six-month presumptively reasonable period following a final removal order, continued detention is lawful only if the government rebuts the noncitizen's showing that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future). Petitioner has been detained for more than seven months since the August 8, 2025 final removal order, and Respondents concede that there is no significant likelihood that removal is reasonably foreseeable. Dkt. 6 at 1. Given Respondents' concession and the Ninth Circuit stay of Petitioner's removal, the Court finds that Petitioner has shown---and the government has not rebutted---that removal is not reasonably foreseeable. Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. Therefore, Petitioner's continued detention is unlawful under Zadvydas, and he is entitled to immediate release.The Court's ruling and injunctive terms are set forth in a separate order at Dkt. 11. Signed by Judge Jinsook Ohta on 04/02/2026. (rh) Modified on 4/7/2026 (rxc). (Entered: 04/02/2026)

#11

Apr 02, 2026

Order

#12

Apr 02, 2026

Judgment - Clerk

Apr 02, 2026

Minute Order (No Time) AND ~Util - Terminate Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

#13

Apr 03, 2026

Declaration

#15

Apr 10, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#16

Apr 10, 2026

Notice (Other)

#17

Apr 10, 2026

Notice and Order of Document Discrepancies

#18

Apr 13, 2026

Reconsideration

#19

Apr 13, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#20

Apr 13, 2026

Reconsideration

#21

Apr 13, 2026

Notice and Order of Document Discrepancies

#22

Apr 24, 2026

Minute Order by Judge Jinsook Ohta: Following Petitioner's release from custody, Dkt. 11, the government filed a motion to reconsider, arguing that Petitioner is actually subject to mandatory detention under § 1225 because his removal was stayed by the Ninth Circuit. Dkt. 20. The Court finds that representation is necessary given the complexity and potential validity of the constitutional, statutory, and procedural issues presented. Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, the Court CONDITIONALLY APPOINTS Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. as counsel effectively immediately. The Court ORDERS Petitioner to submit a form CJA 23 financial affidavit by May 21, 2026 to demonstrate financial eligibility. See Terrovona v. Kincheloe, 912 F.2d 1176, 118182 (9th Cir. 1990); 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(b).The Court further ORDERS Petitioner to file a response to the motion for reconsideration by May 21, 2026. Respondents may file a reply by June 4, 2026. The Court will take the matter under submission. Signed by Judge Jinsook Ohta on 04/24/2026. (rh) (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (rxc). (Entered: 04/24/2026)

#23

Apr 24, 2026

Notice of Appearance

Apr 24, 2026

Minute Order (No Time) AND ~Util - Set Motion and R&R Deadlines/Hearings

#24

Apr 27, 2026

Notice of Appearance