1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 FERNANDO GARCIA-CORTES, No. 1:25-cv-1777-WBS-SCR 11 Petitioner, 12 v. ORDER 13 GOLDEN STATE ANNEX DETENTION FACILITY, et al., 14 Respondents. 15 16 Petitioner, an immigration detainee who is representing himself, filed a petition for a writ 17 of habeas corpus pursuant to

. He has paid the filing fee for this action. In light 18 of the fact that petitioner paid the filing fee, his motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as 19 moot. 20 Petitioner has also filed a motion for the appointment of counsel. At this early stage in the 21 litigation, it is not clear that the interests of justice require the appointment of counsel for 22 petitioner. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Weygandt v. Look,

(9th 23 Cir. 1983). Therefore, petitioner’s motion for counsel is denied without prejudice to renewal. 24 The court has conducted a preliminary review of the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the 25 Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254.1 Because petitioner may be entitled 26

27 1 Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254 allows a district court to apply any or all of the rules to other types of habeas corpus petitions including § 2241 28 petitions. 1 | to the requested relief if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondent will 2 || be served with the § 2241 petition and directed to show cause why the writ should not be granted 3 || by filing an answer/return. See

. 4 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 5 1. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is denied as moot based 6 || on the payment of the filing fee for this action. 7 2. Petitioner’s motion to appoint counsel (ECF No. 3) is denied without prejudice to 8 | renewal. 9 3. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of 10 || petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

on the United 11 || States Attorney. 12 4. Respondent’s answer/response to the § 2241 petition is due no later than 20 days from 13 | the date of this order. 14 5. Petitioner’s reply is due 14 days after being served with the answer. 15 6. In order to ensure this court’s jurisdiction to resolve the pending § 2241 petition, 16 | respondent shall not transfer petitioner to another detention center outside of this judicial district, 17 || pending further order of the court. See

(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which 18 || empowers the federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective 19 || jurisdictions....”); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co.,

(1966) (emphasizing that 20 | federal courts have the power to “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction or maintain the status quo by 21 | injunction pending review of an agency’s action”). 22 || DATED: December 10, 2025

24 SEAN C. RIORDAN 25 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 27 28