Luo v. LaRose et al

1
25cv3848-LL-VET
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RUI LUO,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER J. LAROSE, Senior
Warden, Otay Mesa Detention Center, et
al.,
Respondents.
Case No.: 25cv3848-LL-VET
ORDER REQUIRING RESPONSE
TO PETITION AND SETTING
BRIEFING SCHEDULE
Petitioner Rui Luo is a detainee in the custody of the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Pending before the Court is her Petition
for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 1 (“Pet.”). Petitioner is a
Chinese asylum seeker and spouse of a U.S. citizen. Id. ¶ 1. Petitioner alleges she was
unlawfully detained on October 9, 2025, which she alleges violates the Due Process Clause
of the Fifth Amendment. Id. She seeks a writ of habeas corpus directing Respondents to
order her immediate release, or alternatively for a bond hearing, among other remedies. Id.
at Prayer for Relief.
The Court finds it necessary to order a limited stay pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28
U.S.C. § 1651, to preserve the status quo until the Court can provide a reasoned decision,
in order to avoid any potential jurisdictional problems if Petitioner is removed from this
Case 3:25-cv-03848-LL-VET Document 2 Filed 01/05/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 3

2
25cv3848-LL-VET
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
district.1 See E-C-R- v. Noem, No. 3:25-CV-1230-SI, 2025 WL 2300543, at *1 & n.1 (D.
Or. July 16, 2025) (“Courts around the country exercise their authority under the All Writs
Act to maintain their jurisdiction over pending immigration matters by preserving the status
quo.” (collecting cases)).
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the following:
1. 	Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why the Petition should
not be granted by filing a written Return on or before January 16, 2026. The Return shall
include any documents relevant to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition.
Respondents shall serve a copy of its Return upon Petitioner concurrently with the filing.
2. 	Petitioner may, but is not required, to reply to the Return by filing a Traverse
on or before January 23, 2026.
3. 	After briefing is complete, the Court will take the matter under submission
and without oral argument pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1(d)(1), unless the parties are
notified otherwise.
4. 	Respondents, their agents, employees, successors, attorneys, and all persons
acting in active concert or participation with them are hereby ENJOINED from removing
Petitioner from the United States or this district pending further order of the Court,
to maintain the status quo to allow the Court to provide a reasoned decision.
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
/ / /
1 Under the All Writs Act, “all courts established by an Act of Congress may issue all writs
necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages
and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a).
Case 3:25-cv-03848-LL-VET Document 2 Filed 01/05/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 3

3
25cv3848-LL-VET
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5. 	The Clerk of Court shall transmit a copy of this Order and the Petition [ECF
No. 1] to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 5, 2026
Case 3:25-cv-03848-LL-VET Document 2 Filed 01/05/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
3 of 3