1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MAP SIM, 11 Case No. 23-cv-05725 NC (PR) Petitioner, 12 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. 13 ICE, et al., 14 Respondents. 15

16 17 Petitioner, who is currently detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement 18 (“ICE”) pending his removal, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 19

, asserting that his continued detention violates his constitutional rights. 20 Dkt. No. 1 at 4. Petitioner consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 4. 21 Petitioner has paid the filing fee. Dkt. No. 3. 22 23 DISCUSSION 24 A. Standard of Review 25 This court may entertain a petition for writ of habeas corpus from a person “in 26 custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. 27 § 2241(c)(3). 1 cause why the writ should not be granted, unless it appears from the application that the 2 applicant or person detained is not entitled thereto.”

. 3 B. Petitioner’s Claims 4 Petitioner was born in Cambodia and moved to the United States on October 26, 5 1981. Dkt. No. 1 at 3. He was convicted of first-degree residential robbery.

ICE took 6 him into custody on June 23, 2023, and subsequently, an Immigration Judge ordered 7 Petitioner’s removal on July 3, 2023.

. He has yet to be removed because the 8 Cambodian government “fluctuate[s] in taking back Cambodian detainees” and that it can 9 take 2-4 years for detainees to be taken back.

Petitioner asserts that his continued 10 detention is unlawful and violates

(a)(6), as interpreted by the Supreme 11 Court in Zadvydas v. Davis,

(2001): the reasonable period of detention 12 has expired and his removal is not significantly likely to occur in the reasonably 13 foreseeable future. Id. at 5. Liberally construed, Petitioner’s claim is cognizable. The 14 Court orders Respondent to show cause why the petition should not be granted. 15 16 CONCLUSION 17 For the foregoing reasons: 18 1. The Clerk shall electronically serve a copy of this order upon Respondents 19 and Respondents’ attorneys, the United States Attorney for the Northern District of 20 California, at the following email addresses: (1) [email protected]; (2) 21 [email protected]; and (3) [email protected]. The petition and the exhibits 22 thereto are available via the Electronic Case Filing System for the Northern District of 23 California. The Clerk shall also include a magistrate judge jurisdiction consent/declination 24 form. The Clerk also shall serve a copy of this order on Petitioner. 25 Respondents shall file their Consent or Declination to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction 26 no later than twenty-eight (28) days from the date the form is sent from the Court. 27 2. Respondents shall serve on Petitioner, within 60 days of the issuance of this 1 Respondents shall file with the answer and serve on Petitioner a copy of all portions of his 2 immigration record that are relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the 3 petition. If Petitioner wishes to respond to the answer, he shall do so by filing a traverse 4 with the Court and serving it on Respondents within 30 days of his receipt of the answer. 5 3. Respondents may file a motion to dismiss on procedural grounds in lieu of 6 an answer. If Respondents file such a motion, Petitioner shall file with the Court and serve 7 on Respondents an opposition or statement of non-opposition within 28 days of receipt of 8 the motion, and Respondents shall file with the court and serve on Petitioner a reply within 9 14 days of receipt of any opposition. Petitioner may move for an extension of time to file 10 a response if an attorney has not yet been located. 11 4. Petitioner has the responsibility to prosecute this case. Petitioner is reminded 12 that all documents and communications with the Court must be served on Respondents by 13 mailing a true copy of the document or communication to Respondents’ counsel. 14 Petitioner must keep the Court and all parties informed of any change of address by filing a 15 separate paper captioned “Notice of Change of Address.” He must comply with the 16 Court’s orders in a timely fashion. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this 17 action for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 DATED: March 7, 2024 20 NATHANAEL M. COUSINS United States Magistrate Judge 21 22 23 24 Order to Show Cause 25 PRO-SE\NC\HC.2023\05725Sim_osc2241 26 27