Tawasha v. Napolitano et al

Filing 14

ORDER that Respondents must answer the Petition within 20 days of the date this Order is filed. Respondents must not file a dispositive motion in place of an answer without first showing cause as to why an answer is inadequate. Petitioner may file a reply within 20 days from the date of service of the answer. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Edward C. Voss pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 08/22/11. (ESL)

1

WO

JKM

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Rami Fuad Tawasha,

10

Petitioner,

11

vs.

12
Janet Napolitano, et al.,
13
Respondents.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 11-1101-PHX-GMS (ECV)
ORDER

15
16

Petitioner Rami Fuad Tawasha (A043-705-269), who is represented by counsel, has

17

filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The Court will

18

require Respondents to answer the Petition.

19

Petitioner is a native of Kuwait. He has been a lawful permanent resident of the

20

United States since 1993. On May 20, 2009, an Immigration Judge found that Petitioner was

21

removable as an alien who has been convicted of an aggravated felony and ordered that he

22

be removed to Jordan or in the alternative Kuwait. On September 29, 2009, the Board of

23

Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal. On October 9, 2009, he filed a petition for

24

review and a motion for stay of removal with the United States Court of Appeals for the

25

Ninth Circuit. Tawasha v. Holder, No. 09-73222 (9th Cir.). On March 24, 2010, the Ninth

26

Circuit continued Petitioner’s temporary stay of removal until it issues its mandate. Id.

27
28
TERMPSREF

Petitioner argues that his continued detention while his appeal is pending is
unconstitutional and inconsistent with the Immigration and Nationality Act. See Casas-

1

Castrillon v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 535 F.3d 942, 952 (9th Cir. 2008) (an alien who is

2

subject to discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) is entitled to a hearing before an

3

Immigration Judge “with the power to grant him bail unless the government establishes that

4

he is a flight risk or will be a danger to the community”). An answer to the Petition will be

5

required. Because summonses appear to have been served and because counsel for

6

Respondents has entered an appearance, the Court will not direct the Clerk to effect service

7

of process.

8

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondents must answer the Petition within

9

20 days of the date this Order is filed. Respondents must not file a dispositive motion in

10

place of an answer without first showing cause as to why an answer is inadequate. Petitioner

11

may file a reply within 20 days from the date of service of the answer.

12

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Edward

13

C. Voss pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for further

14

proceedings and a report and recommendation.

15

DATED this 22nd day of August, 2011.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
TERMPSREF

-2-