Singh v. Holder et al

Filing 34

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Response due by 2/17/2012. Habeas Answer due by 3/30/2012.. Signed by Judge Jeffrey S. White on 1/30/12. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

VIJENDRA SINGH,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

Petitioner,

No. C 09-03012 JSW

v.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

12

ERIC HOLDER, JR., et al.,

13

Respondents.
/

14
15

On February 25, 2010, this Court denied a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by

16

Vijendra Singh. On March 31, 2011, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and

17

remanded this matter, and it directed the Court to grant the writ and order Singh’s release unless

18

within 45 days of this Court’s Order, respondents provide Singh a new Casas hearing applying

19

the standards set forth in the Ninth Circuit’s opinion. See Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1196, 1212

20

(9th Cir. 2011). On January 5, 2012, the Court received the Ninth Circuit’s mandate.

21

On that same date, the Court issued an Order, pursuant to the Ninth Circuit’s directions,

22

in which it granted Singh’s petition and ordered Respondents to release Singh, unless within 45

23

days of this Order, they provide Singh a new Casas hearing applying the standards set forth in

24

the Ninth Circuit’s opinion. The Court also directed Respondents to file a notice with this

25

Court advising the Court whether they have released Singh or whether they intend to provide

26

him a new Casas hearing.

27

On January 10, 2012, Respondents filed the notice required by the Court’s January 5,

28

2012 Order. In that notice, they advised that Singh had been lawfully removed to Fiji in July
2011. Thus, Respondents advised the Court that Sing “is no longer in custody and Respondents

1

cannot provide [Singh] with a Casas hearing in accordance with this Court’s Order.” (Docket

2

No. 33, Notice at 1:23-26.)
In light of this notice, the parties are HEREBY ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the

4

Court should not modify its January 5, 2012 Order as follows: “The Court HEREBY GRANTS

5

Singh’s petition, in light of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling,” and enter judgment in favor of Singh

6

and against Respondents.1 The Court FURTHER ORDERS the parties to meet and confer on

7

this issue and to submit a joint response to this Order to Show Cause by no later than February

8

17, 2012. If the parties are unable to agree, they may set forth their respective positions in the

9

joint response required by this Order.

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
Dated: January 30, 2012
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

3

12

JEFFREY S. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
The Court will not revisit the mootness issue, in light of the Ninth Circuit’s
decision to deny Respondent’s motion to remand with instructions to dismiss the case as
moot.
1

28

2