Edgar Cleofas Pedro v. Luis Soto, et al.

Pedro v. Soto · United States District Court for the District of New Jersey · January 8, 2026 · No. 25-18257 (JXN)

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey addresses Edgar Cleofas Pedro’s amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging his detention. The Court denies without prejudice his request for an order to show cause, temporarily enjoins his transfer, and directs the respondents to answer the petition and provide supporting records.

Holdings

  1. Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, as applied to § 2241 cases through Rule 1(b), provides the court with more flexible time limits for ordering an answer and supersedes the conflicting timing provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2243.
  2. The request for an order to show cause under § 2243 is denied without prejudice because the court directed respondents to answer under the Habeas Rules.
  3. Respondents are temporarily enjoined from transferring petitioner from his current detention facility during the pendency of the action, pending further order of the court.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the court should issue an order to show cause under 28 U.S.C. § 2243 requiring respondents to answer within the statutory time limits.
  2. Whether Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, as applied to § 2241 proceedings through Rule 1(b), provides more flexible response deadlines and supersedes conflicting timing requirements in § 2243.
  3. Whether respondents should be temporarily enjoined from transferring Pedro from his current detention facility during the pendency of the habeas action.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (6)

  • Iremashvili v. Rodriguez, No. 15-6320, 2017 WL 935441, at *2 (D.N.J. Mar. 9, 2017)(followed)
  • Capozzi v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 21-19533, 2021 WL 5881587, at *1 (D.N.J. Dec. 13, 2021)(followed)
  • Schumaker v. Knight, 23-20834, 2024 WL 866347, at *1 (D.N.J. Feb. 29, 2024)(followed)
  • Sempier v. Johnson & Higgins, 45 F.3d 724, 736 (3d Cir. 1995)(followed)
  • United States v. Christian, 660 F.2d 892, 899 (3d Cir. 1981)(followed)
  • Penfield Co. of Cal. v. SEC, 330 U.S. 585, 589 n.5 (1947)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…