United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
February 28, 2014
JOEL ENRIQUE RIVERA PALMA, Plaintiff,
NATALIE ASHER, Defendant.
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
Before the court are the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of Magistrate Judge Mary Alice Theiler (R&R (Dkt. # 11)), and Petitioner Joel Enrique Rivera Palma's objections thereto (Objections (Dkt. # 14)). This is a habeas corpus case. Mr. Palma is currently being held in immigration detention by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (R&R at 1.) He was arrested for Driving Under the Influence ("DUI"), sentenced to a day in jail, and was thereafter detained without the possibility of bond. ( Id. at 2.) He requested and was granted a bond hearing, but the Immigration Judge found that he was a danger to the community and denied him bond. ( Id. ) Mr. Palma then filed this habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Mot. (Dkt. # 3).) In the petition, Mr. Palma challenges the constitutionality of the immigration bond and detention process. ( See id. at 1-2.) Fundamentally, he argues that the present statutory scheme governing immigration bond and detention grants unfettered discretion to ICE authorities and immigration judges, resulting in a system that grants or withholds liberty to those subject to its mandates in a manner that is arbitrary, non-uniform, and violative of basic notions of due process. ( See id.; Objections at 1-5.)
Mr. Palma's objections to the R&R were filed late. ( See Dkt.) They were filed after the deadline for objections established by the court. ( See Dkt. # 11.) Before the objections were filed, the court had already approved and adopted the R&R, dismissed the case, and issued a judgment. ( See 2/25/14 Order (Dkt. # 12); Judgment (Dkt. # 13).) Nevertheless, Mr. Palma's objections raise issues not addressed in the R&R that merit the court's attention. ( See Objections.) Given that Mr. Palma is detained, the court finds good cause to alter the scheduling order and accept Mr. Palma's late-filed objections. The court also construes Mr. Palma's late filing liberally as a motion for relief from final judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), GRANTS the motion,  and WITHDRAWS its previously-entered Order of Dismissal and Judgment (Dkt. ## 12, 13).
The government will be permitted one week to respond to Mr. Palma's objections, and the objections shall be noted for the court's consideration on Friday, March 7, 2014. If the Government has any objection to the court's acceptance of Mr. Palma's late filings or decision to relieve Mr. Palma from the previously-entered judgment, those objections should be detailed in the Government's response.