Abdullah Ahmad Jumadar v. Dora Castro, Warden, Otero County Processing Center;...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

ABDULLAH AHMAD JUMADAR, Petitioner, v. No. 2:26-cv-0159 KG/JMR DORA CASTRO, WARDEN, Otero County Processing Center; MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA, Field Officer Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, El Paso Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department Of Homeland Security; and PAMELA BONDI, U.S. Attorney General, Respondents,1

ORDER TO ANSWER AND GRANTING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Before the Court is Petitioner Abdullah Ahmad Jumadar’s pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) (Petition), filed on January 26, 2026.

Petitioner is a citizen of Afghanistan and challenges his detention in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody at the Otero County Processing Center in New Mexico. Also before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (Doc. 2) (IFP Motion). It appears Petitioner is unable to prepay the $5.00 habeas filing The Petition lists the Warden as a party Respondent. The Court adds the above-mentioned parties as additional Respondents in this case. See Lowmaster v. Dir., Bureau of Prisons, 2024 WL 5135970, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 17, 2024) (“the Court notes that it routinely substitutes the” proper parties as “respondent in habeas cases”); Danderson v. Page, 2024 WL 3913051, at *2 (E.D. Okla. Aug. 20, 2024) (substituting the proper party respondent in a habeas case). fee. The Court will grant the IFP Motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(4) and Petitioner shall be excused from prepaying the filing fee.

Petitioner states that he has been in ICE custody since February 2, 2025. (Doc. 1) at 1.

He further states that on October 9, 2025, an immigration judge “denied all relief and didn’t give chance to appeal,” and that he would be in danger if returned to Afghanistan. Id. at 1, 6-7.

Petitioner seeks release from immigration detention. Id. at 7.

Having conducted an initial review of the Petition, the Court will order Respondents to answer the Petition (Doc. 1). In pro se habeas cases, the practice of this Court is to provide a copy of the Petition to the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) when an answer is required.

The Clerk will email a copy of the Petition (Doc. 1) and this Order to Respondents at [email protected]. Respondents must answer the pro se Petition within ten (10) business days of entry of this Order and show cause why the requested relief should not be granted. See Habeas Rules 1(b), 4 (courts have discretion to set a time for respondents to answer a habeas petition). Petitioner may file an optional reply within ten (10) business days after the answer brief is filed.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. The Clerk’s Office shall forward a copy of the Petition (Doc. 1) and this Order to the United States Attorney’s Office at: [email protected]; 2. Respondents must answer the Petition within ten (10) business days of entry of this Order and show cause why the requested relief should not be granted. If Petitioner wishes to file an optional reply, he must do so within ten (10) business days after Respondents’ response is filed; and 3. Petitioner’s Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (Doc. 2) is GRANTED.

/s/Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________ CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE • Please note that this document has been electronically filed. To verify its authenticity, please refer to the Digital File Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic Filing) accompanying this document.

Electronically filed documents can be found on the Court’s PACER public access system.