District of New Jersey • 2:26-cv-00798

#1

Jan 26, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-17029291.), filed by GURDEEP SINGH. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(GOLDMAN, MICHAEL) (Attachment 1 replaced on 1/27/2026) (mj, ). (Entered: 01/26/2026)

#2

Jan 26, 2026

MOTION for Order to Show Cause by GURDEEP SINGH. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(GOLDMAN, MICHAEL) (Entered: 01/26/2026)

#3

Jan 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER: Acting pursuant to the All Writs Act, see 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the Court hereby enjoins the Respondents and those acting for them from removing the Petitioner from this District or causing his removal. This is an administrative stay, the purpose of which is to briefly freeze the status quo and preserve the Court's jurisdiction should it exist. See Zheng v. Bondi, 2025 WL 280542, at *1 (D.N.J. Sept. 26, 2025). Whether, after the Court of Appeals' decision in Khalil v. President, United States of America, 2026 WL 111933 (3d Cir. Jan. 15, 2026), the Court has habeas jurisdiction in a certain class of cases is an issue now being briefed in another case. See Aygun v. Soto, 2026 WL 136151, at *1 (D.N.J. Jan. 16, 2026). On or before January 26 at 11:59 pm, the Respondents shall indicate whether its habeas jurisdiction arguments in Aygun v. Soto are different in any meaningful way from any habeas jurisdiction arguments that might be relevant in this case. The Petitioner shall file a letter brief on or before January 30 at noon indicating whether, after the Court of Appeals' Khalil decision, the Court has habeas jurisdiction in this case. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 1/26/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 01/26/2026)

#4

Jan 26, 2026

Letter from US Attorney's Office Regarding Effect of Khalil re 3 Order,,,,. (SILAGI, ALEX) (Entered: 01/26/2026)

#5

Jan 26, 2026

Letter from Michael Z. Goldman. (GOLDMAN, MICHAEL) (Entered: 01/26/2026)

Jan 26, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Jan 26, 2026

Case assigned to Judge Michael E. Farbiarz. (jr)

Jan 26, 2026

Order

Jan 26, 2026

QC - Attorney Case Opening

Jan 26, 2026

CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The case you electronically filed has been processed, however, the following deficiencies were found: Nature of Suit - changed from 465 to 463. The Clerk's Office has made the appropriate changes. Please refer to the Attorney Case Opening Guide for processing electronically filed cases. (jr)

Jan 27, 2026

QC - Fillable PDF

Jan 27, 2026

CLERK'S QUALITY CONTROL MESSAGE - The 1 -1 Civil Cover Sheet filed by MICHAEL GOLDMAN on 1/26/2026 was uploaded prior to being flattened. Before uploading fillable forms to ECF you must flatten the file to prevent other users from manipulating or editing the information. The easiest way to flatten a PDF form is by selecting Print to PDF and saving the flattened form, other PDF software may differ. Please visit our website under Flattening PDF Forms for guidance. Your document has been corrected. This message is for informational purposes only. (mj)

#6

Jan 28, 2026

Substitution of Attorney

#7

Jan 29, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Respondents shall file a letter brief on or before February 2 at 10:00am. It shall answer two questions in detail and with full reference to the governing caselaw. First, whether a federal court of appeals considering a petition for review after the Board of Immigration Appeals issues a final order of removal can consider whether the immigration courts should have treated the relevant petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (as opposed to under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)) and therefore as eligible for a bail hearing. Second, and relatedly, whether any decision of the immigration courts to treat a petitioner under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (as opposed to under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)) "is a 'matter[ ] on which the validity of the final order [of removal entered by the BIA] is contingent.'" Khalil v. President, United States, 2026 WL 111933, at *10 (3d Cir. Jan 15, 2026) (quoting Massieu v. Reno, 91 F.3d 416, 422 (3d Cir. 1996)). If yes, the Respondents shall explain why this is so. If no, the Respondents shall explain why this is not so --- and also what the implications of that are for whether 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9) strips habeas jurisdiction from district courts asked to consider whether a detained noncitizen purportedly covered by 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) should be treated as covered by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). (The briefing to this point from the Respondents has been glancing, and not commensurate with the "complex[ity]" of this issue, as they have described it. See ECF 14. It is imperative that the letter brief due to be filed on Monday be a sustained treatment of the relevant legal issues.) The Petitioner is free to weigh in on the issues described here, by means of a letter brief to be filed on or before February 3 at 10:00am. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 1/29/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 01/29/2026)

Jan 29, 2026

Order

#8

Feb 02, 2026

Letter

#9

Feb 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Court recently confirmed its jurisdiction over this class of cases. See Aygun v. Soto, No. 25-cv-18540 (D.N.J. Feb. 5, 2026) (ECF 22). Accordingly, a bond hearing shall be conducted on or before February 6 at 5:00pm, unless, by February 6 at 3:00pm the Respondents file a letter explaining either (i) that the Petitioner has asked to adjourn the bond hearing or (ii) that, due to relevant and meaningful procedural or factual distinctions, this case is not controlled by the Court's prior decisions in Chiquito Barzola v. Warden (25-cv-17326); Martinez Ron v. Lyons (25-cv-17359); and Mboup v. Field Off. Dir. of N.J. Immigr. & Customs Enf't (25-cv-16882). The Respondents shall file a status update letter on or before February 9 at 5:00pm. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 2/5/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 02/05/2026)

Feb 05, 2026

Text Order

#10

Feb 06, 2026

Letter

#11

Feb 06, 2026

Order

#12

Feb 11, 2026

Letter

#13

Feb 12, 2026

TEXT ORDER: A petition was filed, see ECF 1, a bail hearing was ordered, see ECF 3, and it was conducted. See ECF 12 . Therefore, it appears that the petition should be dismissed. Chiquito Barzola v. Warden, 2025 WL 3443487, at *1 (D.N.J. Dec. 1, 2025). If a party has a different view, it should explain why in a brief letter, to be filed on or before February 18 at 5:00pm. If no persuasive letter is received, the petition will be promptly dismissed. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 2/2/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

Feb 12, 2026

Text Order

Mar 05, 2026

Order of Dismissal