Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01111/USCOURTS-caed-2_08-cv-01111-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUKHWINDER S. MANN,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-08-1111 MCE DAD P

vs.

MICHAEL MUKASEY, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER

 /

Petitioner is being detained at the Yuba County Jail by the United States Bureau

of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Petitioner has filed a habeas petition pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and has paid the filing fee.

In his form petition, petitioner challenges his indefinite detention. Petitioner

contends that on March 10, 2004, he was ordered deported, excluded or removed from the United

States and that the Board of Immigration Appeals denied his appeal in 2004. Petitioner was born

in India and is awaiting removal to that country.

The court will order petitioner to provide the following information or documents

in support of his claim. First, petitioner must provide the date or documents reflecting the date

on which petitioner was initially placed in ICE detention. Second, petitioner must clarify

whether he has been in continuous ICE detention at Yuba County Jail since March 10, 2004, and

Case 2:08-cv-01111-MCE -DAD Document 6 Filed 09/08/08 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

if not, the dates and locations of the places where petitioner has been detained. Third, petitioner

must clarify whether the county of India has refused to allow him to repatriate back to India, and

the reason for the refusal or delay. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that within thirty days from the service

of this order petitioner shall file his response to this order. Petitioner’s failure to comply with

this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See

Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

DATED: September 5, 2008.

DAD:4

mann1111.ord

Case 2:08-cv-01111-MCE -DAD Document 6 Filed 09/08/08 Page 2 of 2