Moran v. Bondi
Darwin-Alexander Moran v. Pamela Bondi
- Proceeding
- original
- Outcome
- dismissed — Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Roger T. Benitez (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a pro se habeas corpus petition filed by an immigration detainee that lacked the required filing fee or in forma pauperis application. The court dismissed the case without prejudice, granting the petitioner until December 1, 2025, to pay the fee or prove inability to pay.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Dismissal of the case without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement.“Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to satisfy the filing fee requirement.” | agree with court The court correctly applied the local rules and federal regulations governing habeas corpus proceedings, which require a $5.00 filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Because the petitioner failed to provide either, the court was required to dismiss the case. The dismissal without prejudice, coupled with an extended deadline to cure the defect, is a standard and appropriate procedural remedy for a pro se litigant who has not yet had the opportunity to respond to the deficiency. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly identifies the jurisdictional defect (lack of filing fee or IFP application), cites the appropriate local and federal rules, and provides a clear path for the petitioner to cure the defect. The extension of the deadline is a reasonable exercise of the court's discretion to ensure due process for a pro se litigant.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DARWIN-ALEXANDER MORAN, Case No.: 25cv2657 BEN (VET) A#246-232-822, 12 ORDER DISMISSING CASE Petitioner, 13 WITHOUT PREJUDICE v. 14 PAMELA BONDI, 15 Respondent. 16 17 18 On October 1, 2025, Petitioner Darwin-Alexander Moran, an immigration detainee 19 housed at the Imperial Regional Detention Facility and proceeding pro se, filed a Petition 20 for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the Northern District of 21 California. (ECF No. 1.) After providing notice to Petitioner that he had not paid the filing 22 fee nor requested to proceed in forma pauperis (see ECF No. 2), on October 2, 2025, the 23 Northern District ordered the case transferred here because the Imperial Regional 24 Detention Facility lies in this district. (See ECF No. 3 at 1, citing 28 U.S.C. §§ 84(d), 25 1404(a), 2241(a); Doe v. Garland, 109 F.4th 1188 (9th Cir. 2024).) On October 7, 2025, 26 the instant case was transferred to this district and docketed here. (ECF Nos. 4-5.) 27 A Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus must either be accompanied by a $5.00 filing 28 fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See CivLR 3.2; R. 1(b), 3(a), Rules 1 || Governing Section 2254 Cases (2019). Because the Court cannot proceed until Petitioner 2 || has either paid the $5.00 filing fee or has qualified to proceed in forma pauperis, this case 3 || is subject to dismissal. 4 The Court recognizes the Northern District previously informed Petitioner of the 5 || filing fee requirement and in an October 1, 2025, mailing, instructed if Petitioner did not 6 ||respond on or before November 10, 2025, his case would be dismissed. (See ECF No. 2.) 7 || To date, no response has been docketed. Regardless of that prior order, the Court finds the 8 ||instant case warrants dismissal but extends the deadline to satisfy the filing fee 9 ||requirement. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to 10 || satisfy the filing fee requirement. If Petitioner wishes to proceed with this case, he must 11 ||submit a copy of this Order with the requisite $5.00 fee or adequate proof he cannot pay 12 || the fee no later than December 1, 2025. For Petitioner’s convenience, the Clerk of Court 13 || shall attach to this Order a blank application to proceed in forma pauperis. 14 |} IT ISSO ORDERED. . 15 || Dated: October 8, 2025 A lyputicire 16 Honorable Roger T. Benitez 17 United States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28