(HC) Ceja Ayala v. Current or Acting Field Office Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 San Francisco Division 11 EDUARDO CEJA AYALA, Case No. 25-cv-00047-LB 12 Petitioner, ORDER OF TRANSFER 13 v. 14 CURRENT OR ACTING FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, SAN FRANCISCO FIELD 15 OFFICE, UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS 16 ENFORCEMENT, et al., 17 Respondents.

19 Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus to challenge his detention by immigration officials in Kern County. Petitioner is confined at the Golden State Annex, in McFarland, California. Kern County lies within the venue of the Eastern District of California. See 28 U.S.C. § 84(b).

23 Venue is proper in a habeas action in either the district of confinement or the district of conviction, 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d). The proper respondent to a habeas petition challenging an immigrant’s detention pending a removal order is the warden of the facility housing the detainee.

26 See Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1197 (9th Cir. 2024). The proper venue for such a petition is the district of confinement. Id. at 1199. Thus, the preferred venue for this action is the Eastern 1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and Habeas L.R. 2254-3(b), and in the interests of justice, this action is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

4 The clerk shall transfer this matter forthwith.

5 IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated: April 18, 2025 7 ______________________________________ LAUREL BEELER 8 United States Magistrate Judge