midpage

(HC) Tushar v. Warden, California City Detention Center(HC) Tushar v. Warden, California City Detention Center

District Court, E.D. California
Aug 4, 2026
1:26-cv-05606

ORDER

Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, I must examine the habeas corpus petition and order a response to the petition unless it “plainly appears” that the petitioner is not entitled to relief.1 It does not plainly appear that petitioner is not entitled to relief. Therefore, I order the government to respond to the petition, and I set a briefing schedule.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

  1. Within seven days of the date of service of this order, respondent must file a response to the petition.
  2. A response may be one of the following:
    1. An answer addressing the merits of the petition. Any argument by respondent that petitioner has procedurally defaulted a claim must be raised in the answer, which must also address the merits of petitioner‘s claims.
    2. A motion to dismiss the petition.
  3. Within seven days of the date of service of this order, respondent must file any documents necessary for resolving the issues presented in the petition.
  4. If respondent files an answer to the petition, petitioner may file a traverse within seven days of the date of service of respondent‘s answer. If no traverse is filed within seven days, the petition and answer are deemed submitted.
  5. If respondent moves to dismiss, petitioner must file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within seven days of the date of service of respondent‘s motion. Any reply to an opposition to the motion to dismiss must be filed within seven days after the opposition is served. The motion to dismiss will be considered submitted twenty-one days after the service of the motion or when the reply is filed, whichever comes first. See Local Rule 230(l).
  6. Petitioner‘s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, is GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 4, 2026

JEREMY D. PETERSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Notes

1
This rule may be applied to petitions brought under § 2241. See Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases.

Case Details

Case Name: (HC) Tushar v. Warden, California City Detention Center
Court Name: District Court, E.D. California
Date Published: Aug 4, 2026
Citation: 1:26-cv-05606
Docket Number: 1:26-cv-05606
Court Abbreviation: E.D. Cal.
Log In