Edwin Rolando Cuscun Ajzalan v. Christopher J. Larose, et al.
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Cathy Ann Bencivengo (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by a detainee at Otay Mesa Detention Center. The court dismissed the petition with leave to amend because the petition lacked crucial factual details regarding the petitioner's entry into the United States and the circumstances of his detention.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Dismissal of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus with Leave to Amend“The Court DISMISSES the Petition with leave to amend because the Petition is missing crucial information for the Court to evaluate whether a response is warranted.” | agree with court The court's decision to dismiss with leave to amend is procedurally appropriate for a pro se petitioner whose initial filing lacks the necessary factual predicate to evaluate the merits of a habeas claim. The order correctly identifies that the petition is deficient due to missing information about entry, prior detention, and current detention circumstances, which are essential for a 2241 petition. Granting leave to amend allows the petitioner to cure these deficiencies. |
The order itself: sound — The order is procedurally sound. It correctly applies the standard for summary dismissal of habeas petitions by citing relevant authority (Kourteva) and identifying specific factual deficiencies in the pro se petition. The court provides clear instructions for amendment, including a deadline and the requirement that the amended petition be complete in itself. The reasoning directly addresses the motion (or lack thereof, as this is a sua sponte or initial screening dismissal) with the right authorities.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EDWIN ROLANDO CUSCUN Case No.: 3:26-cv-5389-CAB-SBC AJZALAN, 12 ORDER DISMISSING PETITION Petitioner, 13 WITH LEAVE TO AMEND v. 14 CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 18 Pro se1 Petitioner Edwin Rolando Cuscun Ajzalan has filed a petition for a writ of 19 habeas corpus pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 2241. [Doc. No. 1 (“Petition”).] Petitioner alleges 20 that he is unlawfully detained at the Otay Mesa Detention Center. 21 The Court DISMISSES the Petition with leave to amend because the Petition is 22 missing crucial information for the Court to evaluate whether a response is warranted. See 23 Kourteva v. I.N.S., 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (“Summary dismissal is 24 appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory, palpably 25 26 1 Petitioner may be interested in contacting Federal Defenders of San Diego to see if a Federal Defender 27 can represent Petitioner in this matter. The telephone number for Federal Defenders’ San Diego Office is 619-234-8467 (Toll Free: 888-614-9867) and the El Centro Office is 760-335-3510 (Toll Free: 877-404- 28 1 ||incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”) Petitioner does not provide any information 2 ||regarding how or when he entered the United States, whether he has been previously 3 detained by immigration authorities, or the circumstances of his recent detention on July 4 || 16, 2026. 5 If Petitioner wishes to proceed with this case, he must file a First Amended Petition 6 || within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The First Amended Petition must be 7 ||complete in itself without reference to the original Petition. Respondents not named and 8 claim not re-alleged will be considered waived. See CivLR 15.1(a). 9 Itis SO ORDERED. 10 || Dated: September 21, 2026 12 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 3 United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28