DUNBAR v. GREEN

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the Clerk shall serve a copy of the petition (Dkt. No. 1) and this Order upon respondent Green by regular mail with all costs of service advanced by the United States, and the Clerk shall forward a copy of the petition (Dk t. No. 1) and this Order to the Chief, Civil Division, United States Attorneys Office, at the following email address: USANJ-HabeasCasesusdoj.gov. Within 30 days of the date of the entry of this Order, respondent shall file and serve an answer whi ch responds to the allegations and grounds in the petition and which includes all affirmative defenses respondent seeks to invoke. Within 30 days of receipt of the answer, petitioner may file a reply to the answer; and within 7 days of petitioner's release, by parole or otherwise, respondent shall electronically file a written notice of the same with the Clerk; etc. Signed by Judge Kevin McNulty on 2/17/17. (sr, )(N/M)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
OLIVER ROYSTAN DUNBAR,
Petitioner,

Civ. No. 17-1001 (KM)

V.

CHARLES GREEN,

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Respondent.

Petitioner is an immigration detainee currently lodged at the Essex County Correctional
Facility in Newark, New Jersey. He is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus
pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2241.

Petitioner challenges his current immigration detention in his federal habeas petition.
“Federal courts have habeas jurisdiction to examine the statutory and constitutional bases for an
immigration detention unrelated to a final order of removal.” Ufele v. Holder, 473 F. App’x 144,
146 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing Demore v. Kin,, 538 U.S. 510, 5 17-18 (2003)); see also Diop v.
ICE/Homeland Sec., 656 F.3d 221, 226 (3d Cir. 2011). In accordance with Rule 4 of the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases, applicable to

§ 2241

cases through Rule 1(b) of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases, this Court has screened the habeas petition for dismissal and
determined that dismissal without an answer and the record on this issue is not warranted. In
addition to any arguments that respondent may make in the answer in response to petitioner’s
claims, respondent shall specifically address what impact, if any, Chavez-Alvarez v. Warden
York Cnly. Prison, 783 F.3d 469 (3d Cir. 2015) and Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001),
have on the habeas petition.

Accordingly, IT IS this 17th day of February, 2017,
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve a copy of the petition (Dkt. No. 1) and this Order
upon respondent Green by regular mail, with all costs of service advanced by the United States;
and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall forward a copy of the petition (Dkt. No. 1) and this Order
to the Chief, Civil Division, United States Attorney’s Office, at the following email addres
s:
USANJ-HabeasCasesusdoj.gov; and it is further
ORDERED that within thirty (30) days of the date of the entry of this Order, respondent
shall file and serve an answer which responds to the allegations and grounds in the petitio
n and
which includes all affirmative defenses respondent seeks to invoke, in addition to any other
arguments respondent may make, the answer shall specifically address what impact, if any,
Chavez-Alvarez v. Warden York Cnty. Prison, 783 F.3d 469 (3d Cir. 2015) and Zad’iydas
v.
Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), have on the habeas petition; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent shall file and serve with the answer certified copies of all
documents necessary to resolve petitioner’s claim(s) and affirmative defenses; and it is further
ORDERED that within thirty (30) days of receipt of the answer, petitioner may file a
reply to the answer; and it is further
ORDERED that within seven (7) days of petitioner’s release, by parole or otherwise,
respondent shall electronically file a written notice of the same with the Clerk; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this Order on petitioner by regular U.S. mail.

United States District Judge
2