Wilmar Eduardo Ramos Ixcotoyac v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

I UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA || Wilmar Eduardo RAMOS IXCOTOYAC, Case No.: 26-cv-0482-AGS-DDL 4 Petitioner,’ QRDER DISMISSING PETITION || WITHOUT PREJUDICE U.S. IMMIGRATION and CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE), 7 Respondent.

9 Petitioner Wilmar Ramos Ixcotoyac seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. || § 2241 to free him from immigration detention. But his petition fails to name the proper ||respondent. Petitions for habeas corpus must name as a respondent “the person who has || custody over” the petitioner. “T]he default rule is that the proper respondent is the warden || of the facility where the prisoner is being held[.]” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 || (2004); see also Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188, 1199 (9th Cir. 2024) (“affirm[ing] the 15 application of the immediate custodian” rule to “habeas petitions filed pursuant to 28 |/U.S.C. § 2241, including those filed by immigrant detainees” and ruling a district court 17 cannot consider a misnamed petition). Ramos Ixcotoyac only names “U.S. Immigration |/and Customs Enforcement (ICE)” as a respondent. (ECF 1, at 1.) So, the petition must be || dismissed, but Ramos Ixcotoyac may file an amended petition remedying that defect. Any || amended petition is due February 23, 2026.

21 ||Dated: January 29, 2026 23 Hon. rew G. Schopler United States District Judge ]