Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00068/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00068-1/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

27

28

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)

HENG ZHAO, ) 1:05-cv-00068-OWW- TAG HC

)

) ORDER TO RESPONDENT TO FILE 

) FILE PETITIONER’S ALIEN FILE

) 

) 

Petitioner, ) 

) 

v. )

) 

)

JOHN ASHCROFT, et al., )

 )

)

Respondents. )

 )

Petitioner is detained by the United States Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(“ICE”) and is proceeding with a Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. 

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)

and Local Rule 72-302. 

DISCUSSION

Petitioner originally filed his petition on January 18, 2005. (Doc. 1). On April 5, 2005,

Petitioner filed an amended petition, alleging that he is a native of China who is subject to a final

order of removal. (Doc. 7, p. 2). Petitioner also alleges that he has been in the custody of ICE since

December 7, 2004, and that his continued detention is in violation of § 241(a) of the Immigration

Case 1:05-cv-00068-OWW -TAG Document 12 Filed 09/20/05 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

27

28

2

and Naturalization Act, and the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Zadvydas v. Davis, 121

S.Ct. 2491 (2001). (Doc. 7, p. 2). Petitioner requests his immediate release or, alternatively, his

release on bond. (Id. at p. 4). Petitioner does not challenge the underlying final order of removal.

On June 6, 2005, the Court issued to Respondent an Order to Show Cause why the amended

petition should not be granted. (Doc. 10). The order stated, in part, that “Respondent SHALL

INCLUDE a copy of Petitioner’s Alien File and any and all other documentation relevant to the

determination of the issues raised in the petition.” (Doc. 10, p. 2). On July 18, 2005, Respondent

filed its response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause. (Doc. 11). Respondent contends in its

response that Petitioner has failed to cooperate with the removal process and has failed to

demonstrate that his removal is not likely to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future. (Doc. 11, p.

5). To date, however, Respondent has not complied with the Court’s order of June 6, 2005 to file

Petitioner’s Alien File. 

Considering the scant information in the present record, the Court believes that Petitioner’s

Alien File would assist the Court in determining the issues in this case.

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent SHALL FILE Petitioner’s Alien

File with the Court within twenty (20) days of the date of service of this order. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 19, 2005 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00068-OWW -TAG Document 12 Filed 09/20/05 Page 2 of 2