Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-01098/USCOURTS-azd-2_03-cv-01098-1/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 (Federal)

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ali Partovi, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney

General; Michael Chertoff, Secretary of

the Department of Homeland Security, 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CIV 03-1098-PHX-EHC (JM)

ORDER

On June 6, 2003, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Dkt. 1). On June

2, 2004, Petit ioner filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Dkt. 35), to which

Respondents filed a Resp onse on February 28, 2005 (Dkt. 40). On August 25, 2005,

Respondents filed a Motion to Transfer. (Dkt. 41). On September 7, 2005, Pet it ioner filed

a Motion for Release. (Dkt. 42). On September 13, 2005, Respondents filed a Motion to

Withdraw the Motion to Transfer with Regard to Petitioner's Continued Detention. (Dkt.

43). On October 18, 2005, Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Marshall issued a Report and

Recommendation. (Dkt. 48). Petitioner has not filed an Objection.

A district court judge reviews de novo the Report and Recommendation of a

Magistrate Judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

The Court having reviewed the record de novo, adopts in full the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and incorporates the same as a part of this

Order.

Case 2:03-cv-01098-EHC-JR Document 49 Filed 12/12/05 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 -

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrat e Judge is

adopted in full. (Dkt. 48).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner's Amended Petition for a Writ of

Habeas Corpus is DENIED. (Dkt. 35).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent s' Motion to Transfer is GRANTED

(Dkt. 41) as it relates to a review of the order of removal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is TRANSFERRED to the United Stat es

Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit insofar as it relates to a review of the order of

removal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents' Motion to Withdraw the Motion t o

Transfer with Regard to Petitioner's Continued Detention (Dkt. 43) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Pet it ioner's Motion for Release is DENIED. (Dkt.

42).

DATED this 8th day of December, 2005.

Case 2:03-cv-01098-EHC-JR Document 49 Filed 12/12/05 Page 2 of 2