govinfo:USCOURTS-okwd-5_26-cv-01091-1

1 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA 
 
CATARINA LETICIA GOMEZ ) 
RIQUIAC, ) 
 ) 
 Petitioner, ) 
 ) 
v. ) Case No. CIV-26-1091-D 
 ) 
WARDEN DIAMONDBACK ) 
CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, et al., ) 
) 
 Respondents. ) 
 
ORDER 
 
 Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 
[Doc. No. 1]. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell 
for initial proceedings in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C). 
On May 13, 2026, Petitioner filed an Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining 
Order [Doc. No. 3]. In it, Petitioner requests that the Court grant temporary injunctive relief 
prohibiting Respondents from transferring Petitioner outside the jurisdiction of this Court, 
removing Petitioner from the United States during the pendency of this action, removing 
Petitioner to any third country without explicit authorization from this Court, or retaliating 
against Petitioner for filing this action. [Doc. No. 3, at 3]. 
On May 19, 2026, Judge Mitchell issued a Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 
12], in which she recommends that the Court deny Petitioner’s request for a temporary 
restraining order. Specifically, the magistrate judge concluded that Petitioner had failed to 
“certify[] in writing any efforts made to give notice [to the non-movant] and the reasons 

2 
 
why it should not be required,” and thus had failed to comply with FED. R. CIV. P. 65(b)(1). 
Judge Mitchell notified the parties of their right to object to the R&R on or before June 9, 
2026, and that failure to timely object to the R&R waives the right to appellate review of 
both factual and legal issues contained therein. See Moore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 
659 (10th Cir. 1991). 
 Upon review of the file and noting no timely objection to the findings and 
recommendations of the magistrate judge, the Court ADOPTS the Report and 
Recommendation [Doc. No. 12] in its entirety. 
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the Report and 
Recommendation [Doc. No. 12], Petitioner’s Emergency Motion for Temporary 
Restraining Order [Doc. No. 3] is DENIED. 
IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of June, 2026. 
 

Passage view · GavelSight