(HC) Riego v. Current or Acting Field Office Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al

Filing 17

ORDER GRANTING Petitioner's #14 Motion to Amend to Name a Proper Respondent; ORDER Substituting Minga Wofford as Respondent, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 10/27/2024. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11

VENANCIO ESTEBAN RIEGO,

12
13
14
15

Case No. 1:24-cv-01162-SKO-HC

Petitioner,

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S
MOTION TO AMEND TO NAME A
PROPER RESPONDENT
[Doc. 14]

v.
MINGA WOFFORD,

ORDER SUBSTITUTING MINGA
WOFFORD AS RESPONDENT

Respondent.

16
17

Petitioner is a non-citizen detainee proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas

18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. He filed the instant petition on March 25, 2024. Upon
19 review of the petition, the Court found Petitioner had failed to name a proper respondent. Thus,
20 on October 3, 2024, the Court granted Petitioner leave to amend the respondent to avoid
21 dismissal of the action. (Doc. 12.) On October 24, 2024, Petitioner filed a motion to amend the
22 respondent. (Doc. 14.)
23
24

DISCUSSION
A petitioner seeking habeas corpus relief must name the officer having custody of him as

25 the respondent to the petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2242; Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 430
26 (2004); Ortiz-Sandoval v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 891, 894 (9th Cir. 1996). As explained by the
27 Supreme Court in Padilla, the proper respondent in habeas cases “is the warden of the facility
28 where the prisoner is being held, not the Attorney General or some other remote supervisory

1

1 official.” Padilla, 542 U.S. at 435.
Petitioner is being detained at Golden State Annex (“GSA”) located in McFarland,

2

3 California. Petitioner seeks to amend his petition to name Minga Wofford, the administrator at
4 GSA, as the respondent in this matter. Because Ms. Wofford has direct custody of Petitioner,
5 she is a proper respondent. Padilla, 542 U.S. at 440 (“the immediate custodian, not a
6 supervisory official who exercises legal control, is the proper respondent”).
ORDER

7

Accordingly, Petitioner’s motion to amend the petition is GRANTED, and Minga

8

9 Wofford is SUBSTITUTED as Respondent in this matter.
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 Dated:

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto

October 27, 2024

.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2