Hashmatullah Khatir/Abdul Rahim Rasooli v. Christopher Chestnut, et al.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA HASHMATULLAH KHATIR/ABDUL No. 1:26-cv-00094-TLN-SCR RAHIM RASOOLI, Petitioners, 13 ORDER v. CHRISTOPHER CHESTNUT, et al., Respondents.

Petitioners, who are immigration detainees proceeding through counsel, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The court has conducted a preliminary review of the petition pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under Section 2254.1 Because petitioners may be entitled to the requested relief if the claimed violation of constitutional rights is proved, respondents will be directed to show cause why the writ should not be granted by filing an answer/return within 14 days from the date of this order. See 28 23 U.S.C. § 2243. Petitioners may file a reply/traverse to the answer/return within 7 days after being served a copy of it. ///// 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 petitions.

1 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 2 1. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this order together with a copy of || Petitioners’ application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on the United | States Attorney.

5 2. Respondents are directed to file an answer/return within 14 days from the date of this || order. If an answer/return is filed, respondents shall include with the answer/return any and all || transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues presented in the | application.

9 3. Petitioners’ reply/traverse, if any, is due within 7 days after being served a copy of || respondent’s answer/return.

11 4. Absent a further order of the court, the petition will be taken under submission after the | filing of the reply/traverse.

13 5. In order to ensure this court’s jurisdiction to resolve the pending § 2241 petition, | respondent shall not transfer petitioner to another detention center outside of this judicial district, | pending further order of the court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which || empowers the federal courts to “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective || jurisdictions....”); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (emphasizing that | federal courts have the power to “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction or maintain the status quo by | injunction pending review of an agency’s action’’).

20 | DATED: January 8, 2026 mk SEAN C. RIORDAN 23 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE