Eastern District of New York • 1:26-cv-00476

#1

Jan 28, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Temporary Restraining Order filing fee $ 5, receipt number ANYEDC-19850201, filed by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Motion Proposed Motion for Restraining Order) (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

#2

Jan 28, 2026

MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez. (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

#3

Jan 28, 2026

Civil Cover Sheet.. by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

#4

Jan 28, 2026

Civil Cover Sheet.. by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

Jan 28, 2026

Notice: Re: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet

Jan 28, 2026

NOTICE: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet. The Civil Cover Sheet was not filled out correctly - The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed 2 Page Form Civil Cover Sheet. Please resubmit a COMPLETED Civil Cover Sheet including the SECOND PAGE (NOT THE INSTRUCTION PAGE). The form is available at: https://www.nyed.uscourts.gov/document-search . SEARCH CATEGORIES Forms FILTER Clerks Office Forms and Instructions SEARCH JS 44 Civil Cover Sheet Revised 12/10/2025 Please submit corrected Civil Cover Sheet under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (SDM)

Jan 28, 2026

Notice: Missing Civil Cover Sheet. The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed Civil Cover Sheet. Please submit corrected Civil Cover Sheet. The form is available at: https://www.nyed.uscourts.gov/document-search . SEARCH CATEGORIES Forms FILTER Clerks Office Forms and Instructions SEARCH JS 44 Civil Cover Sheet Revised 02/13/2025 Please submit corrected Civil Cover Sheet under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (SDM)

#5

Jan 29, 2026

Civil Cover Sheet.. by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 01/29/2026)

#6

Jan 29, 2026

Quality Control Check - Attorney Case Opening

Jan 29, 2026

Order to Show Cause (Federal) AND ~Util - Set Hearings

Jan 29, 2026

Notice: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet. The Civil Cover Sheet you have submitted was not fully completed. The Clerk's Office cannot assign this case without a completed Civil Cover Sheet. A Civil Cover Sheet was provided to Attorney via email. Please resubmit corrected Civil Cover Sheet. This event can be found under the event Other Documents - Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (SDM)

Jan 29, 2026

Notice: Re: Incomplete Civil Cover Sheet

Jan 29, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Jan 29, 2026

ORDER: Petitioner is directed to serve his Petition 1 and motion 2 for a temporary restraining order and order to show cause on Respondent, and file proof of service of such, no later than January 30, 2026. Respondent is directed to show cause, no later than February 3, 2026, why Plaintiff's motion 2 for temporary restraining order should be denied. Petitioner shall file any reply on or before February 6, 2026. A hearing as to Petitioner's motion 2 for temporary restraining order shall be held on February 10, 2026, at 2:30 p.m., before Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall in Courtroom 4H North.Petitioner shall not be transferred except to a facility within this District, the Southern District of New York, or the District of New Jersey absent further order of this court in light of Petitioners' interests in participating in further proceedings before this Court and maintaining adequate access to legal counsel through these proceedings.Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 1/29/2026. (CG)

Jan 29, 2026

Case Assigned to Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (SDM)

#7

Feb 02, 2026

Affidavit of Service

Feb 02, 2026

ORDER: In direct contravention of the Court's January 29, 2026 Order, Petitioner failed to file proof of service of his petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 (the "Petition") and motion for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") 2 by January 30, 2026. Petitioner is directed to serve the Petition and motion for a TRO, and file proof of service, no later than February 3, 2026. Respondent is directed to show cause, no later than February 6, 2026, why Plaintiff's motion for a TRO should be denied. Petitioner shall file any reply on or before February 10, 2026. The hearing as to Petitioner's motion for a TRO scheduled for February 10, 2026, is ADJOURNED to February 17, 2026, at 2:00 p.m.. Should Petitioner fail to file proof of service of the Petition and motion for a TRO by February 3, 2026, this action will be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 2/2/2026. (CG)

Feb 02, 2026

1 - Terminate Hearings AND Order to Show Cause (Federal)

#8

Feb 05, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#9

Feb 05, 2026

Response to Order to Show Cause

Feb 12, 2026

Order to Show Cause (Federal)

Feb 12, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The Court is in receipt of Respondents' response 9 to the Court's Order to Show Cause, in which Respondents contend Petitioner has already received the relief sought in his motion for a temporary restraining order ("TRO"). As such, Petitioner is directed to SHOW CAUSE, no later than February 16, 2026, as to why his motion 2 for a TRO should not be denied as moot. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 2/12/2026. (NCW)

Feb 17, 2026

ORDER: In direct contravention of the Court's February 12, 2026 Order, Petitioner failed to show cause as to why his motion for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") should not be denied as moot by February 16, 2026. As such, the hearing as to Petitioner's motion for a TRO, scheduled for February 17, 2026, is ADJOURNED sine die. Petitioner is direct to respond to the Court's February 12, 2026 Order to Show Cause no later than February 19, 2026. Failure to do so will result in denial of Petitioner's motion for a TRO for failure to prosecute. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 2/17/2026. (CG)

Feb 17, 2026

1 - Terminate Hearings AND Order to Show Cause (463)

#10

Feb 19, 2026

Letter Petitioner's Letter Fully Prosecuting this Habeas and in Opposition to Respondent's Claim that the TRO Should be Denied as Moot by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Letters in Support of Petitioner's Good Moral Character, # 2 Exhibit Supporting Documents, # 3 Exhibit Supporting Documents) (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 02/20/2026)

#11

Feb 20, 2026

Letter Correcting Caption in Letter at ECF 10 by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Attachments: # 1 Errata) (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 02/20/2026)

#12

Feb 20, 2026

Letter Requesting an Order Directing Respondents to File a Full Return Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243 by Victor Ignacio Caivanagua Sanchez (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 02/20/2026)

Feb 24, 2026

Order to Show Cause (463)

Feb 24, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Respondents are directed to SHOW CAUSE, no later than March 4, 2026, as to why the petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 should not be granted. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 2/24/2026. (NCW)

#13

Mar 04, 2026

Response to Order to Show Cause

#14

Mar 10, 2026

Letter

Mar 12, 2026

Scheduling Order

Mar 12, 2026

ORDER: A hearing as to Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 and motion for a temporary restraining order 2 shall be held on March 18, 2026, at 4:00 p.m., before Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall in Courtroom 4H North. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 3/12/2026. (NCW)

#15

Mar 17, 2026

Letter

#16

Mar 18, 2026

Letter

#17

Mar 18, 2026

Letter

Mar 18, 2026

ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Respondents' letter 15, in which Respondents concede that "this case would be decided in Petitioner's favor" should the Court "adhere[] to its conclusions in" Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026). In Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026), the Court rejected the respondents' arguments that the petitioners were lawfully detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A). Instead, the Court held that the petitioners were detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) because, among other things, the Court was not persuaded that the respondents sustained their burden in proving that the petitioners were "seeking admission" to the United States at the time they were detained. This finding, as Respondents' acknowledge, was the "central legal issue" in those petitions as it is here. Moreover, Respondents' effort to distinguish this case from Singh is unavailing. It is true that, in this case, Petitioner had not been released pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) or any other statutory mechanism. However, as Respondents concede, Petitioner has lived in the United States for "a quarter-century," which, in this Court view, evidences that Petitioner is not "seeking admission." See Rodriguez-Acurio v. Almodovar, No. 2:25-CV-6065 (NJC), 2025 WL 3314420, at *22 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 28, 2025) (Although [the petitioner] is an applicant for admission, she clearly is not presenting herself at the border and was not recently apprehended just after entering, and thereby is not seeking admission under Section 1225(b)(2).) Ultimately, the Court finds that Petitioner's detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). As such, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), Petitioner was entitled to an individualized custody determination. Petitioner did not receive one. And, in view of the considerations set forth in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976), Respondents' failure to provide Petitioner with a pre-detention process, notice, or opportunity to respond was in contravention of Petitioner's due process rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution. For these reasons, and as will be set forth more fully in the forthcoming memorandum and order in Estrada Alfaro and Singh, respectively, the Petition is GRANTED in part. Specifically, the Court grants Count Two of the Petition on the grounds that Petitioner was denied due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Respondents are directed to immediately release Petitioner from ICE detention, accordingly. The Court reserves determination on Petitioner's remaining claim. Accordingly, the hearing as to Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 and motion for a temporary restraining order 2, scheduled for March 18, 2026, is ADJOURNED sine die. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 3/18/2026. (CG)

Mar 18, 2026

1 - Terminate Hearings

Mar 18, 2026

ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Respondents' letter 15, in which Respondents concede that "this case would be decided in Petitioner's favor" should the Court "adhere[] to its conclusions in" Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026). In Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026), the Court rejected the respondents' arguments that the petitioners were lawfully detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225. Instead, the Court held that the petitioners were detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) because, among other things, the Court was not persuaded that the respondents sustained their burden in proving that the petitioners were "seeking admission" to the United States at the time they were detained. This finding, as Respondents' acknowledge, was the "central legal issue" in those petitions as it is here. Moreover, Respondents' effort to distinguish this case from Singh is unavailing. It is true that, in this case, Petitioner had not been released pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) or any other statutory mechanism. However, as Respondents concede, Petitioner has lived in the United States for "a quarter-century," which, in this Court view, evidences that Petitioner is not "seeking admission." See Rodriguez-Acurio v. Almodovar, No. 2:25-CV-6065 (NJC), 2025 WL 3314420, at *22 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 28, 2025) (Although [the petitioner] is an applicant for admission, she clearly is not presenting herself at the border and was not recently apprehended just after entering, and thereby is not seeking admission under Section 1225(b)(2).) Ultimately, the Court finds that Petitioner's detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). As such, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), Petitioner was entitled to an individualized custody determination. Petitioner did not receive one. And, in view of the considerations set forth in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976), Respondents' failure to provide Petitioner with a pre-detention process, notice, or opportunity to respond was in contravention of Petitioner's due process rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution. For these reasons, and as will be set forth more fully in the forthcoming memorandum and order in Estrada Alfaro and Singh, respectively, the Petition is GRANTED in part. Specifically, the Court grants Count Two of the Petition on the grounds that Petitioner was denied due process in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Respondents are directed to immediately release Petitioner from ICE detention, accordingly. The Court reserves determination on Petitioner's remaining claim. Accordingly, the hearing as to Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus 1 and motion for a temporary restraining order 2, scheduled for March 18, 2026, is ADJOURNED sine die. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 3/18/2026. (CG)