Arellano-Uruena v. Johnson et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
LUIS FRANCISCO ARELLANO-URUENA, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
v. ) Case No. CIV-26-2165-J
)
JOSHUA JOHNSON, et al., )
)
Respondents. )
ORDER
Petitioner Louis Francisco Arellano-Uruena filed a Motion of Habeas Corpus challenging
his detention with United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). [Doc. No. 1]. The
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell consistent with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(B), (C). Judge Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the
Court dismiss the Petition for Petitioner’s failure to comply with the Court’s order and/or prosecute
the action. [Doc. No. 7]. Specifically, Judge Mitchell noted that Petitioner failed (1) to pay the
$5.00 filing fee or seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis, (2) cure that deficiency when ordered
to, or (3) update his address so that he could receive the Court’s orders and instructions. See id. at
1-3. Petitioner did not object,1 thus waiving his right to de novo review. See Casanova v. Ulibarri,
595 F.3d 1120, 1123 (10th Cir. 2010).
1 Petitioner did not receive the Report and Recommendation as it was returned to sender. [Doc.
No. 8]. While the Court understands the complexity and challenges involved in ICE detention, the
Court agrees with Judge Mitchell that it was ultimately Petitioner’s responsibility to update the
Court with his current address. See LCvR 5.4.
Case 5:26-cv-02165-J Document 9 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 7] is ADOPTED and Petitioner’s
Petition [Doc. No. 1] is DISMISSED.2
A separate judgment will enter.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of October, 2026.
2 Based on Petitioner’s failure to pay, cure deficiencies, or update his address, the Court would
dismiss the Petition even on de novo review.
Case 5:26-cv-02165-J Document 9 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 2