Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3

4 RAFAEL ZAMORA ZAMORA, Case No.: 3:26-cv-03993-LEK-JAC 5 Petitioner, 6 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND v. DENYING IN PART VERIFIED 7 PETITION FOR WRIT OF 8 DAVID VENTURELLA, Acting Director, HABEAS CORPUS 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Immigration and Customs Enforcement; 9 PATRICK DIVVER, Director of Field 10 Operations, San Diego Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; 11 KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. 12 Department of Homeland Security; PAMELA BONDI, U.S. Attorney 13 General; CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, 14 Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, Respondents. 15 17 Before this Court is Petitioner Rafael Zamora Zamora’s (“Petitioner”) 18 Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (“Petition”), filed on 19 July 11, 2026. [Dkt. no. 1.] The respondents, identified in the Petition as David 20 Venturella, Acting Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”); Patrick 21 Divver, Director of Field Operations, San Diego Field Office, ICE; Kristi Noem, 22 Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Pamela Bondi, U.S. Attorney 23 General; and Christopher J. LaRose, Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center 24 (“Respondents”), filed a return to the Petition (“Return”) on July 20, 2026. [Dkt. no. 4.] 25 Petitioner, a citizen of Mexico, entered the United States without inspection 26 in 2000. He claims to have continuously resided in the United States since his entrance 27 1 over twenty-five years ago. See Petition at ¶ 45. He is married to a United States citizen 2 and has a child who is also a United States citizen. See id. at ¶ 46. Petitioner alleges that 3 he has was apprehended by ICE agents on July 4, 2026. As of the filing of the Petition, 4 Petitioner was detained at the Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego, California. See 5 id. at ¶¶ 1-2. Petitioner alleges he is entitled to, inter alia, release, or in the alternative, a 6 bond hearing pursuant to Title 8 United States Code Section 1226(a). See id. at pg. 17. 7 Respondents state “that Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under [8 8 U.S.C.] § 1225(b)(2).” [Response at 2.] Respondents, however, “acknowledge[] that this 9 Court, and Courts in this District, have repeatedly reached the opposite conclusion under 10 the same and/or similar facts.” [Id. (collecting cases).] Respondents, therefore, “do[] not 11 oppose the petition and defer[] to the Court on the appropriate relief.” [Id. at 3.] 12 After the Petition was fully briefed, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 13 issued its opinion in Rodriguez v. Bostock, No. 25-6842, 2026 WL 2196424 (9th Cir. 14 July 30, 2026). In Rodriguez, the Ninth Circuit held that noncitizens “present without 15 admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject to the 16 detention regime of § 1226, not § 1225(b)(2)(A).” Id. at *3. Because there is no dispute 17 that Petitioner was detained in the interior of the United States after having entered the 18 United States without inspection in 2000, see Petition at ¶¶ 45, 48, the discretionary 19 detention procedures of Section 1226(a) govern Petitioner’s detention. Accordingly, this 20 Court grants Petitioner’s request for a bond hearing.1 In addition, this Court makes the 21 following orders regarding the bond hearing: 22 23 24 25 1 In light of this Court’s determination that Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing, this Court need not address Petitioner’s Fifth Amendment due process claim, [Petition at 26 pg. 16]. See Nw. Austin Mun. Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193, 205 (2009) 27 (“normally the Court will not decide a constitutional question if there is some other ground upon which to dispose of the case” (quotation marks and citation omitted)). 28 1 -the hearing must be held within seven days after the filing of this order; 2 -the hearing must be before a fair, neutral, and open-minded immigration judge; 3 -the immigration judge shall determine whether Petitioner is a danger to the community 4 or a flight risk and what bond conditions, if any, would be appropriate to ensure 5 Petitioner’s appearance; 6 -the immigration judge shall consider whether alternatives to detention are appropriate 7 and, if a bond is considered, the immigration judge shall consider Petitioner’s 8 ability to pay; 9 -if the immigration judge denies bond, the immigration judge must make specific 10 findings as to why Petitioner is a flight risk or a danger to the community; and 11 -if Petitioner believes that Respondents or the immigration judge violated this order and 12 the writ, Petitioner can apply to this Court for appropriate sanctions. 13 Petitioner has also requested that this Court award him attorney’s fees and costs. See 14 Petition at pg. 17. This Court will consider an application requesting reasonable 15 attorney’s fees and costs that is filed within thirty days of the entry of judgment. This 16 Court, therefore, denies Petitioner’s request for attorney’s fees and costs without 17 prejudice. 18 CONCLUSION 19 For the foregoing reasons, Petitioner Rafael Zamora Zamora’s Verified 20 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 28 U.S.C. § 2241, filed July 11, 2026, is GRANTED 21 22 23 2 This Court denies Respondents’ request to allow Petitioner’s individualized bond hearing to be held within fourteen days after the filing of this order. See Response at 3 24 n.2. Petitioner’s interest in an expeditious remedy for the violation of his statutory rights 25 outweighs the general concerns cited by Respondents. If there is a case-specific reason why Petitioner’s individualized bond hearing cannot be held within seven days, 26 Respondents may file a motion to extend the deadline. Respondents’ motion must, at a 27 minimum, establish the reason why an extension is necessary through a declaration or other supporting documents. 28 1 || PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Petition is GRANTED insofar as Respondents 2 ||are ORDERED to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing under Title 8 3 || United States Code Section 1226(a) within seven days of the filing of this Order. 4 || Respondents are FURTHER ORDERED to conduct the individualized bond hearing 5 || consistent with the terms of this Order. The Petition is DENIED WITHOUT 6 || PREJUDICE as to Petitioner’s request for immediate release from custody. Further, the 7 || Petition is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Petitioner’s request for attorney’s 8 || fees and costs. 9 The parties are DIRECTED to file a joint status report informing this Court 10 || of the outcome of the bond hearing by August 18, 2026. 11 DATED AT HONOLULU, HAWAII, August 4, 2026. 12 <foeilz,. 13 ef : Mg /s! Leslie E. Kobayashi 14 Leslie E. Kobayashi b Senior U.S. District Judge 15 $ Ta 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2° RAFAEL ZAMORA ZAMORA VS. DAVID VENTURELLA, ETC. ET AL; 3:26- 26 || cv-03993 LEK-JLB; ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2241 28