1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 ARMAN TIGRANYAN, No. 1:25-cv-1554-DJC-SCR 11 Petitioner, 12 v. ORDER 13 WARDEN OF CALIFORNIA CITY DETENTION, 14 Respondent. 15 16 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 17 of habeas corpus pursuant to

. Based on the length of petitioner’s immigration 18 detention, the court provisionally authorizes petitioner to proceed in forma pauperis without 19 prepayment of the filing fee for this action. See

. 20 Respondent filed a response to petitioner’s § 2241 petition on November 28, 2025. ECF 21 No. 6. In light of the complexity of the legal issues involved in this case, the court has 22 determined that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel. See Weygandt v. 23 Look,

(9th Cir. 1983). The court will appoint Sophia Wang, of the U.C. 24 Berkeley Law Criminal Law & Justice Center, to represent petitioner throughout the course of all 25 proceedings in this court. 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 27 1. Petitioner is provisionally authorized to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment 28 of the filing fee in this action. 1 2. Sophia Wang (CA Bar #319151) is appointed to represent petitioner. 2 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order, the habeas petition, and 3 || respondent’s response, on attorney Wang at sophia.wang(@berkeley.edu. 4 4. In light of the appointment of counsel, the previously established briefing schedule on 5 || the § 2241 petition is vacated. 6 5. The parties shall meet and confer within 3 court days of the filing of this order 7 || concerning a schedule for further proceedings in this matter. 8 6. The parties shall file a joint proposed briefing schedule and submit it to the court by 9 || emailing it to [email protected] no later than 10 days from the date of this order. 10 7. At the time petitioner files a brief or amended petition, petitioner shall also file an 11 | application to proceed in forma pauperis. 12 8. Upon review of the parties’ briefs in this matter, the court will determine whether oral 13 || argument is necessary. 14 9. In order to ensure this court’s jurisdiction to resolve the pending § 2241 petition, 15 | respondent shall not transfer petitioner to another detention center outside of this judicial district, 16 | pending further order of the court. See

(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which 17 || empowers the federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective 18 || jurisdictions....”); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co.,

(1966) (emphasizing that 19 | federal courts have the power to “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction or maintain the status quo by 20 | injunction pending review of an agency’s action”). 21 || DATED: December 4, 2025 22 23 )

24 SEAN C. RIORDAN 35 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

26 27 28