Oluwadare v. LaRose et al

1
25-cv-3-AGS-MSB
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
Flourish OLUWADARE,
Petitioner,
v.
Christopher LaROSE, et al.,
Respondents.
Case No.: 25-cv-3782-AGS-KSC
ORDER REQUIRING RETURN
Pro se petitioner Flourish Oluwadare seeks a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 to free him from immigration detention. At this stage, he need only make out a
claim that is sufficiently cognizable to warrant an answer or return. See Rules Governing
Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, Rule 4 (authorizing summary
dismissal “if it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner
is not entitled to relief”); id., Rule 1(b) (permitting application of Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases to any “habeas corpus petition”). In this context, the relevant federal rules
permit “summary dismissal of claims that are clearly not cognizable.” Neiss v. Bludworth,
114 F.4th 1038, 1045 (9th Cir. 2024) (cleaned up). But “as long as a petition has any
potential merit, it is not so frivolous or incredible as to justify summary dismissal[.]” Id.
In December 2024, Oluwadare, “a citizen of Nigeria and South Africa,” entered the
United States and has been in immigration detention ever since. (ECF 1-2, at 2.) On “June
24, 2025,” an immigration judge granted his “application for Withholding of Removal to
Nigeria.” (Id. at 2–3.) Because immigration judges often enter a final order of removal
while simultaneously granting a request for withholding of removal to a particular country,
this suggests that respondents have held Oluwadare in post-final-removal-order custody
for longer than both the 90-day standard removal period and the six-month presumptively
reasonable period. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1)(A) (“[W]hen an alien is ordered removed, the
Attorney General shall remove the alien from the United States within a period of
90 days[.]”); Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 701 (2001) (recognizing “six months” as a
Case 3:25-cv-03782-AGS-KSC Document 2 Filed 01/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
1 of 2

2
25-cv-3-AGS-MSB
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
“presumptively reasonable period” for post-removal-order detention). So, he asserts, his
“removal from the United States is not reasonably foreseeable,” and he should be released.
(ECF 1-2, at 3.)
There is one complicating factor: Although Oluwadare was granted withholding of
removal from Nigeria, an immigration judge still apparently “ordered” him “removed to
South Africa.” (ECF 1-2, at 3.) That removal order’s posture is unclear.
Nonetheless, because it appears that Oluwadare has been in immigration detention
for over six months, his petition has “potential merit” and suffices to warrant an answer.
See Neiss, 114 F.4th at 1045. By January 13, 2026, respondents must answer the petition.
Any reply by petitioner must be filed by January 20, 2026.
Dated: January 6, 2026
___________________________
Hon. Andrew G. Schopler
United States District Judge
Case 3:25-cv-03782-AGS-KSC Document 2 Filed 01/06/26 PageID.<pageID> Page
2 of 2