District of Nevada • 2:26-cv-01429

#1

May 08, 2026

MOTION/APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Petitioner Keving Davila Aviles.. (Attachments: # 1 Petition WHC, # 2 Pet WHC #2, # 3 Motion for appointment counsel)(WJ) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

#2

May 11, 2026

NOTICE from USDC advising case against Tood Blanche, et al., has been received and assigned case number 2:26-cv-01429-ART-MDC. (WJ) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

#3

May 11, 2026

Order

#4

May 11, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE that this case is directly reassigned to Judge Richard F. Boulware, II for all further proceedings. All further documents must bear the correct case number 2:26-cv-01429-RFB-MDC. (no image attached) (RJDG) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

May 11, 2026

Case randomly assigned to District Judge Anne R. Traum and Magistrate Judge Maximiliano D. Couvillier, III. Nature of Suit: 463 - Habeas Immigration (WJ)

May 11, 2026

Assign Judges in Civil Case

May 11, 2026

Clerks Notice Reassign Judge

#5

May 12, 2026

Order Appointing Counsel AND Order on Motion/Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

#6

May 14, 2026

Notice Appearance of Counsel

#7

May 15, 2026

Notice Other

#8

May 18, 2026

Notice Appearance of Counsel

#9

May 18, 2026

Response

#10

May 22, 2026

Motion Extend/Shorten Time

#11

May 22, 2026

Motion Enforce

#12

May 29, 2026

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 5/29/2026.Before the Court are Petitioner's Motion to Enforce the Court's Appointment Order (ECF No. 11 ) and Unopposed Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 10 ). For the following reasons, the Court denies the former and grants the latter.By way of background, Petitioner initiated this case by applying for a writ of habeas corpus on May 8, 2026. See generally Pet. for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1-1. Based on its preliminary review of Petitioner's initiating documents, the Court appointed counsel, set a briefing schedule, and ordered Respondents to produce certain documents. See Order Appointing Counsel 2-4, ECF No. 5 . On May 18, 2026, Respondents filed a brief response which argues that Petitioner is subject to a reinstated removal order; thus, Respondents seek leave to deport Petitioner from the United States. See Resp'ts' Return 1-2, ECF No. 9 . In turn, Petitioner filed a motion to enforce this Court's order regarding document production, as Respondents allegedly failed to comply with it. See Mot. to Enforce 3. ECF No. 11 . Finally, Petitioner also seeks additional time to file an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the benefit of his missing immigration records. See Mot. to Extend 1, ECF No. 10 . With this procedural history in mind, the Court turns to Petitioner's motions.First, the Court declines to enforce its order regarding document production, as Respondents have already complied with it. True enough, Respondents only produced some of the records contemplated in the Court's prior order. See Order Appointing Counsel 3, ECF No. 5 ; see also Notice of Compliance 12, ECF No. 7 . But, in doing so, Respondents certified that the other records are not "in their possession, custody, or control." Notice of Compliance 2, ECF No. 7 . That is all that Respondents were required to do under the terms of this Court's prior order. See Order Appointing Counsel 3, ECF No. 5 ("Alternatively, by that same date, Respondents must CERTIFY that, after a diligent search, they have determined that the record(s) are not in their possession, custody, or control."). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Petitioner's Motion to Enforce the Court's Appointment Order (ECF No. 11 ) is DENIED. If Petitioner seeks additional documents, or hopes to compel production of records which Respondents should have, Petitioner may file a motion for limited discovery. Alternatively, Petitioner is free to rely on Respondents' certification throughout this case, as it implies that certain records do not exist.Second, while the Court need not enforce its prior order, the Court requires additional discovery to properly dispose of this matter. This Court has the express authority to "use[,] or authorize the use[,] of suitable discovery procedures" to dispose of a viable habeas petition "as law and justice require." Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 290 (1969) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2243). Indeed, it is the "inescapable obligation of [this Court]" to vindicate its "habeas corpus jurisdiction" by fashioning "methods for securing facts where necessary." Id. at 299. In short, this Court's "power of inquiry on federal habeas corpus is plenary." Id. at 292 (citation omitted). As Petitioner points out, see Mot. to Enforce 3, ECF No. 11, Respondents produced an incomplete Warrant of Removal/Deportation (a.k.a., "I-205"). See generally Warrant of Removal/Deportation, ECF No. 9-1 [hereinafter, "I-205"]. Conveniently, the warrant produced by Respondents does "not include page one, which is the page which concerns the directive to take [Petitioner] into custody." Mot. to Enforce 2, ECF No. 11 ; see also generally I-205 (omitting page one). It goes without saying, but Petitioner's entire I-205 is relevant to these proceedings, as it reflects Respondents' authority to take Petitioner into custody. See 8 C.F.R. § 241.8(f) ("Execution of the reinstated order of removal and detention of the [noncitizen] shall be administered in accordance with [8 C.F.R. § 241]"); see also id. § 241.3 ("Once the removal period... begins, [a noncitizen] in the United States will be taken into custody pursuant to a warrant of removal.") (emphasis added); see also Padilla-Ramirez v. Bible, 882 F.3d 826, 831 (9th Cir. 2017) (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 241.3(a)) (suggesting that the warrant requirement applies to noncitizens who are subject to reinstated orders of removal). Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Respondents must PRODUCE Petitioner's entire I-205. Alternatively, Respondents must CERTIFY that the remainder of this document is not in their possession, custody, or control. Respondents have up to, and including, June 2, 2026, to comply with this Order.Third, since Petitioner's Counsel cannot prepare an amended petition until they receive Petitioner's immigration record(s), the Court finds good cause for an extension. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Petitioner's Unopposed Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 10 ) is GRANTED. Petitioner now has up to, and including, June 10, 2026, to file an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus.Finally, until the Court has an opportunity to dispose of Petitioner's claim(s) as "law and justice require," 28 U.S.C. § 2243, the Court declines to lift the administrative stay on Petitioner's removal from this judicial district. Cf. Order Appointing Counsel 5, ECF No. 5 . Otherwise, the Court would empower Respondents to interfere with its jurisdiction over a viable habeas petition. See id. But the Great Writ demands more from our system of justice, which must "guard against the abuse of [executive] power" by protecting individual liberty from the specter of unlawful detention. See Boumediene v. Bush, 533 U.S. 723, 739-40 (2008). As always, Respondents are free to seek relief from this temporary injunction as soon as Petitioner has a full opportunity to present his claim(s) for habeas relief.(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DLQ) (Entered: 05/29/2026)

May 29, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Enforce AND Order on Motion to Extend/Shorten Time

#13

Jun 10, 2026

Motion Extend/Shorten Time

#14

Jun 10, 2026

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 6/10/2026.Before the Court is Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 13 ). Through it, Petitioner seeks an additional week to file his amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus, as Petitioner's Counsel needs more time to review his immigration records. Respondents do not oppose this request.Good cause being found, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Petitioner's Motion to Extend Time (ECF No. 13 ) is GRANTED. Petitioner now has up to, and including, June 17, 2026, to file his amended petition.(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DLQ) (Entered: 06/10/2026)

Jun 10, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Extend/Shorten Time

#15

Jun 17, 2026

Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus Amended

#16

Jun 18, 2026

Notice Manual Filing

#17

Jun 18, 2026

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 6/18/2026.Before the Court is Mr. Aviles's First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which he filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. See generally First Amend. Pet. for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 15 . The Court has reviewed the Petition and preliminarily finds that Mr. Aviles may be entitled to habeas relief based on (i.) the Immigration and Nationality Act and/or (ii.) the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE for Petitioner's detention. See 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Specifically, Respondents must file a "return certifying the true cause of detention" on or before June 24, 2026. In doing so, Respondents must FILE, and AUTHENTICATE, the Warrant of Removal/Deportation (i.e., I-205) which ICE relied on to detain Mr. Aviles, as Petitioner disputes the reliability of this relevant document. See generally Min. Order, ECF No. 12 (May 29, 2026) ("It goes without saying, but Petitioner's entire I-205 is relevant to these proceedings, as it reflects Respondents' authority to take Petitioner into custody.") (citations omitted); see also Rule 7, Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts ("[T]he judge may direct the parties to expand the record by submitting additional materials relating to the petition. The judge may require that these materials be authenticated.") [hereinafter, "Habeas Rules"]; Rule 1, Habeas Rules (empowering this Court to apply these rules to proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2241).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner has up to, and including, June 29, 2026 to reply.Finally, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Court's prior orders regarding briefing, document production, transfer, etc. remain in full effect. See generally Order Appointing Counsel, ECF No. 5 .(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DLQ) (Entered: 06/18/2026)

Jun 18, 2026

Minute Order

#18

Jun 25, 2026

Stipulation

#19

Jun 26, 2026

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 6/26/2026.Before the Court is the Parties' First Stipulation for Extension of Time (ECF No. 18 ). Good cause being found, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Stipulation is GRANTED. Respondents now have up to, and including, June 26, 2026, to respond to the First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 15 ). In turn, Petitioner now has up to, and including, July 1, 2026, to reply.(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DLQ) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#20

Jun 26, 2026

Notice Other

Jun 26, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Stipulation

#21

Jul 01, 2026

Reply