Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 13, 2024

Romero Romero v. Becerra

Judge
Thomas Hixson
Docket
3:24-cv-04262
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
3
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Romero Romero v. Becerra: Judge Hixson dismissed the habeas petition after a Ninth Circuit ruling identified the proper district for the case.

Who this affects

Nectali Romero Romero's habeas petition was dismissed, affecting his case against Moises Becerra and the other named respondents.

What happened

In Romero Romero v. Becerra, Nectali Romero Romero voluntarily dismissed his petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 after a Ninth Circuit decision.

The filing states that the Ninth Circuit held the Eastern District was the proper district for a noncitizen challenging detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Golden State Annex.

Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered that the habeas petition be dismissed. The order does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Romero Romero v. Becerra · No. 3:24-cv-04262
Judge
Thomas Hixson
Date
Aug. 13, 2024

Background

Nectali Romero Romero filed a habeas petition against Moises Becerra and other respondents. The filing states that Romero voluntarily dismissed the petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i) after the Ninth Circuit decided a prior related proceeding. According to the filing, the Ninth Circuit held that the Eastern District was the proper district for a habeas petition by a noncitizen challenging detention by Immigration and Customs Enforcement at Golden State Annex.

Ruling

Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered that the habeas petition be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. The opinion does not state whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice. The court therefore did not decide the underlying detention issue.

Effect

The order ended this petition in the Northern District of California. The text does not state whether Romero filed, or could file, a new petition in another district.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.