1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 RENATA NIGIEMATULINA, Case No. 25-cv-02933-BAS-BJW
12 Petitioner,
ORDER:
13 v.
(1) GRANTING MOTION TO
14 WARDEN OF OTAY MESA
PROCEED IN FORMA
DETENTION CENTER, et al.,
15 PAUPERIS (ECF No. 2);
Respondents.
16
(2) REQUIRING THE
17 GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND
TO THE PETITION; AND
18
19 (3) REFERRING PETITION TO
FEDERAL DEFENDERS FOR
20
EVALUATION REGARDING
21 APPOINTMENT OF
COUNSEL
22
23
24 On October 28, 2025, Petitioner Renata Nigiematulina filed a Petition for Writ of
25 Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) Petitioner also filed a Motion
26 to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) Petitioner, an immigration detainee, attests
27 that she has no assets and cannot pay the $5.00 filing fee. (Id.) The Court grants the Motion
28 to proceed without paying the filing fee.
1 Turning to the allegations, Petitioner claims she is a Russian national who has been
2 detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement since November 2024. (Pet. at 2.)
3 Petitioner claims she cannot be removed to Russia, and her removal is not otherwise
4 reasonably foreseeable. (Id. at 3.) Hence, she alleges her continued detention for over six
5 months violates the Fifth Amendment and is contrary to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678
6 (2001).
7 Having reviewed the Petition, the Court finds summary dismissal is unwarranted at
8 this time. See Kourteva v. INS, 151 F. Supp. 2d 1126, 1128 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (“Summary
9 dismissal is appropriate only where the allegations in the petition are vague or conclusory,
10 palpably incredible, or patently frivolous or false.”). Therefore, the Court will order the
11 Government to respond to the Petition.
12 Finally, given Petitioner’s allegations, the Court finds it appropriate to refer this
13 Petition to Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc. for an evaluation. The Court requests that
14 Federal Defenders determine whether Petitioner would benefit from the appointment of
15 counsel.
16 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS as follows:
17 1. The Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (ECF No. 2) is GRANTED.
18 2. The Government must file a response to the Petition no later than November
19 7, 2025. The Government’s response must address the allegations in the
20 Petition and must include any documents relevant to the determination of the
21 issues raised in the Petition.
22 3. The Clerk of Court shall provide the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s
23 Office with a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this Order.
24 4. The Court REFERS this Petition to Federal Defenders for an evaluation of
25 whether appointment of counsel would be beneficial to Petitioner. The Court
26 requests that Federal Defenders make its evaluation and file a status report or
27 appropriate motion by November 13, 2025.
28
I 5. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and this
2 Order on Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc.
3 IT IS SO ORDERED.
4
5 || DATED: October 30, 2025 yatta Bahar
6 Hon. Cynthia Bashant, Chief Judge
4 United States District Court
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Qe
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.