Singh v. Gonzalez et al

Filing 4

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on March 13, 2006. (jswlc3, COURTSTAFF) (Filed on 3/13/2006)

Singh v. Gonzalez et al

Doc. 4

Case 3:06-cv-01842-JSW

Document 4

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 STIVAN SINGH, Petitioner, v. ALBERTO R. GONZALEZ, Attorney General of the United States and MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, Respondents. / Petitioner Stivan Singh ("Singh"), who is in custody for the purposes of habeas corpus relief because he is in custody of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.1 BACKGROUND Singh is a native and citizen of India, who entered the United States on April 25, 1998. (Pet., ¶ 8.) The government later instituted removal proceedings. In removal proceedings, Singh admitted the factual allegations, and applied for asylum restriction on removal. (Id., ¶¶ 910.) An Immigration Judge denied all forms of relief requested on April 16, 2001, a decision petitioner appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"). The BIA affirmed the IJ's decision on December 23, 2002 without opinion. (Id., ¶¶ 11-12.) Singh filed a peition for ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE No. C 06-01842 JSW IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

United States District Court

11 12
For the Northern District of California

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

Singh also appears to seek mandamus relief and relief under the Declaratory Judgment Act and All Writs Act.
1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 3:06-cv-01842-JSW

Document 4

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

review with the Ninth Circuit on January 21, 2003, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on April 27, 2004. (Id., ¶ 13.) On March 2, 2005, Singh filed a petition for habeas corpus and request for a temporary restraining order challenging his removal with this Court. (Id., ¶ 14.) On March 3, 2005, Singh filed a motion to reopen with the BIA. (Id., ¶ 15.) The motion to reopen was denied on April 18, 2005, and Singh sought review with the Ninth Circuit. That appeal is still pending. (Id., ¶¶ 16-18.) Singh has been detained in Respondents' custody for more than six months, following the BIA's review and denial of the motion to reopen. (Id., ¶ 23.) Singh has requested that he be released pending a decision on his appeal but that request has been denied. (Id., ¶¶ 24-26.) DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard. This Court may entertain a petition for habeas corpus on behalf of a person "in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(1). The Court "shall forthwith award the writ or issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto." 28 U.S.C. § 2243. B. Sing h's Legal Claim. Singh seeks federal habeas corpus relief and contends that Respondents have interpreted 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) to permit them to detain him indefinitely and that this indefinite detention has unlawfully restrained him of his liberty in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Liberally construed, the claims appear colorable under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and merit an answer from respondents. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons and for good cause shown: 1. Singh shall serve a copy of this Order, the petition, and all attachments thereto

United States District Court

11 12
For the Northern District of California

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

upon Respondents no later than March 20, 2006. Singh shall file a proof of service with the Court by March 24, 2006. 2

Case 3:06-cv-01842-JSW

Document 4

Filed 03/13/2006

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2.

Respondents shall file with the Court and serve on Singh, no later than April 20,

2006, an answer showing why a writ of habeas corpus should not be issued. If applicable, Respondents shall file with the answer and serve on Singh a copy of all portions of the administrative record that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the petition. 3. If Singh wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse with

the Court and serving it on Respondents within 30 days of his receipt of the answer. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 13, 2006 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States District Court

11 12
For the Northern District of California

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3