Western District of New York • 6:26-cv-06114

#1

Jan 28, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5.00 receipt number ANYWDC-5697997), filed by Margoth A Vichicela Avalos, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Victor M Medina Gualan, Jhonatan M Cadena Quimbita, Segundo M Moreta Bastidas, Edison R Nacima Maila, Chan M Riascos Mejia, Richar J Cuentas Gomez, Stiven Ortiz Solarte, Yonny J Ibanez Mundo. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Gottfried, David) Modified on 1/28/2026 (JHF). (Entered: 01/28/2026)

Jan 28, 2026

Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (JHF)

Jan 28, 2026

Case assigned to Hon. Meredith A. Vacca. Notification to chambers of on-line civil case opening. (JHF)

#2

Feb 02, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Respondents directed to show cause within 14 days of the date of this order why the Petitioners' relief should not be granted. Petitioner shall have seven days after service of Respondent's return to file a written answer. The Court will determine if an evidentiary hearing is warranted. Respondents will refrain from transferring Petitioners out of the U.S. until after the Court determines if a evidentiary hearing is warranted. Clerk shall serve a copy of 1 petition by email and this order electronically via a Notice of Electronic Filing to the U.S. Attorney's Office, Western of New York at <USANYW-Immigration-Habeas@usdoj.gov>. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/2/26. (JHF) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

Feb 02, 2026

Clerk emailed 1 Petition to USANYW-Immigration-Habeas@usdoj.gov. (JHF)

#3

Feb 03, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam A. Khalil on behalf of Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#4

Feb 03, 2026

MOTION to Sever by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Example order from DNJ)(Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#5

Feb 04, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re Petitioners' different immigration histories and statutes for detention. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#6

Feb 04, 2026

Letter filed by Jhonatan M Cadena Quimbita, Richar J Cuentas Gomez, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Yonny J Ibanez Mundo, Victor M Medina Gualan, Segundo M Moreta Bastidas, Edison R Nacima Maila, Stiven Ortiz Solarte, Chan M Riascos Mejia, Margoth A Vichicela Avalos re withdrawal of motion to sever with respect to five Hurtado detainees. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#7

Feb 04, 2026

TEXT ORDER re. 4 . Respondents' motion to sever is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court disagrees with Respondents' apparent position that it is per se improper to bring a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 with multiple named petitioners. See, e.g., Mahmodi, et al. v. Marich, et al., No.25-CV-6762-MAV, 2026 WL 113473 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2026) (resolving a § 2241 case involving two named petitioners); Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-CV-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3713987 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025), judgment entered sub nom. Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, 2025 WL 3678485 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025) (adjudicating a § 2241 petition on behalf of a "class" of petitioners, "each of whom," inter alia, were foreign nationals arrested pursuant to warrants, requested bond hearings which were denied, and had then-remained detained at the same facility). Cf. Black v. Decker, 103 F.4th 133, 138 (2d Cir. 2024) (consolidating "tandem appeals" to conclude "that a noncitizen's constitutional right to due process precludes his unreasonably prolonged detention under [8 U.S.C. §] 1226(c) without a bond hearing" and then to apply said legal principle to the similar relevant factual circumstances of the two § 2241 habeas petitioners). As Respondents themselves have repeatedly conceded in the significant influx of § 2241 cases filed in the Western District of New York over the last several months, such petitions have often implicated common legal issues, for example, that which this Court addressed in Da Cunha v. Freden, No. 25-CV-6532-MAV, 2025 WL 3280575 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2025), which implicate a discrete set of relevant facts. There is at least a reasonable likelihood that judicial efficiencies could be gained by joining multiple, similarly situated petitioners in a single § 2241 petition.The deadlines set forth in the Court's Order to Show Cause remain. ECF No. 2. If Respondents discover specific facts that they conclude may warrant severance of one or more named petitioners in the instant petition, Respondents may file a renewed motion, raising such particularized grounds. Lastly, Respondents' argument in support of severance that "it would be nearly impossible for an immigration court to hold ten bond hearings within the limited time this Court usually sets," ECF No. 4-1 at 2, is premature. The parties are free to address this practical issue in their substantive responses. SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/4/26. (NWA) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#8

Feb 04, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 2 Order, filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#9

Feb 04, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 8 Reply/Response filed by Jhonatan M Cadena Quimbita, Richar J Cuentas Gomez, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Yonny J Ibanez Mundo, Victor M Medina Gualan, Segundo M Moreta Bastidas, Edison R Nacima Maila, Stiven Ortiz Solarte, Chan M Riascos Mejia, Margoth A Vichicela Avalos. (Gottfried, David) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

#10

Feb 05, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re voluntary departure for Solarte & stay on removal. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/05/2026)

#11

Feb 09, 2026

TEXT ORDER re. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 . On February 3, 2026, Respondents filed a motion to sever each of the 10 petitioners in this action based on, inter alia, the possibility that differing factual circumstances associated with each petitioner may frustrate efficient disposition of the matter. See ECF No. 5. The Court denied that motion without prejudice on February 4, 2026, indicating that should Respondents discover particularized facts that may warrant severance of one or more petitioners, Respondents could renew their motion to sever. ECF No. 7. Also on February 4, 2026, Respondents made two additional filings to supplement its February 3 motion, providing at least some factual distinctions that Respondents contend warrant severance of four of the ten petitioners. See ECF Nos. 5 and 6 . Due to the happenstance of when the multiple February 4 entries were docketed, the Courts text order did not have the benefit of Respondents two supplemental submissions as to more particularized arguments made. For clarity: (A) The Court understands that Respondents have withdrawn their motion to sever the claims of Petitioners Richar J. Cuenta Gomez, Segunda M. Moreta Bastidas, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Margoth A. Vichicela Avalos, and Victor M. Medina Gualan, and that Respondents have submitted a substantive response to the Courts Order to Show Cause with respect to these five petitioners. ECF No. 8. The five such referenced petitioners shall remain parties to the instant matter under case number 26-cv-06114. Counsel for Petitioners shall file a reply, if any, to Respondents submission at ECF No. 8, regarding the five petitioners addressed therein, by February 12, 2026. Counsel for Petitioners is on notice that the Court does not deem the filing on February 4, 2026, ECF No. 9, to be responsive. While ECF No. 9 purports to be a reply/response to Respondents' ECF No. 8 submission on the Order to Show Cause and the caption reflects this matter, the substance of the filing is disconnected from the facts of this case, for example, by distinguishing cases purportedly raised by Respondents that Respondents did not cite in this matter and referring to a single "petitioner" throughout the brief. (B) Respondents' February 3 and 4 submissions did not raise any particularized facts or argument regarding Petitioner Stiven Ortiz Solarte. However, on February 5, 2026, Respondents filed a letter stating that "Petitioner Solarte advised ICE that he wanted to seek voluntary departure, which would involve his leaving the United States." ECF No. 10. Counsel for Petitioners shall file a response regarding Petitioner Solarte by February 12, 2026, either to move for voluntary dismissal of his habeas claims or to object to Respondents' position and argue why Petitioner Solarte's habeas claims should persist as part of this action.(C) As to Petitioners Chan M. Riascos Mejia, Yonny J. Ibanez Mundo, Edison R. Nacima Maila, and Jhonatan M. Cadena Quimbita, Respondents submitted a brief statement of differing factual circumstances that may warrant severance of these four petitioners, including, for example, that one petitioner is subject to a final order of removal and is being detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1231. See ECF No. 5. Counsel for Petitioners shall file a response to the potential severance of these four petitioners from this case by February 12, 2026. Severance would result in dismissal of the habeas claims with respect to the implicated petitioner(s) from this action, without prejudice to refiling. Respondents' deadlines to show cause, see ECF No. 2, with respect to these four petitioners are stayed until the severance issue is resolved.SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/9/26. (NWA) (Entered: 02/09/2026)

#12

Feb 09, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney lifting of stay for Pet. Quimbita's removal. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/09/2026)

#13

Feb 10, 2026

Letter filed by Stiven Ortiz Solarte. (Gottfried, David) (Entered: 02/10/2026)

#14

Feb 11, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re grant of voluntary departure to Solarte. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/11/2026)

#15

Feb 11, 2026

Letter filed by Richar J Cuentas Gomez, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Victor M Medina Gualan, Segundo M Moreta Bastidas, Margoth A Vichicela Avalos. (Gottfried, David) (Entered: 02/11/2026)

#16

Feb 11, 2026

TEXT ORDER re. 10, 13, and 14 . For the reasons stated in Respondents' February 5 and 11, 2026 letters regarding Petitioner Solarte's voluntary departure, ECF Nos. 10, 14, to which Petitioner Solarte does not object, ECF No. 13, Petitioner Solarte's claims for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 are dismissed as moot, and all prior orders with respect to Petitioner Solarte are lifted. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Petitioner Solarte as a party to this action.The Court's orders with respect to Petitioners Chan M. Riascos Mejia, Yonny J. Ibanez Mundo, Edison R. Nacima Maila, and Jhonatan M. Cadena Quimbita, see ECF No. 11, remain for the time being given Petitioners' deadline of February 12, 2026, to respond to Respondents' submissions regarding severance.SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/11/26. (NWA)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 02/11/2026)

#17

Feb 11, 2026

TEXT ORDER re. 6, 8, and 15 . The Court finds that Petitioners Richar J. Cuenta Gomez, Segunda M. Moreta Bastidas, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Margoth A. Vichicela Avalos, and Victor M. Medina Gualan (the "Hurtado Petitioners") are detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) for the reasons explained in the Court's decision and order in Da Cunha v. Freden, No. 25-CV-6532-MAV, 2025 WL 3280575 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2025). Respondents conceded that this case, as pertaining to the Hurtado Petitioners, share a common question of law with the Court's decision in Da Cunha and that the Court's resolution of the question in Da Cunha controls the results in the instant case should the Court adhere to its prior reasoning. ECF Nos. 6, 8. In Da Cunha, the Court considered whether a petitioner who had been present in the country for a period of years and was not actively seeking lawful entry through inspection by an immigration officer was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) or 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). The Court found that the petitioner was detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and was therefore entitled to an initial bond hearing under existing federal regulations. Da Cunha, 2025 WL 3280575, at *7. Accordingly, the Hurtado Petitioners' requests for a writ of habeas corpus are GRANTED to the extent that Respondents are hereby ORDERED to provide the five Hurtado Petitioners with individualized, initial bond hearings before an Immigration Judge within ten (10) days of the date of this Order.In reply to Respondents' return to the Court's order to show cause, the Hurtado Petitioners did not make an argument to rebut Respondents' position that the burden at the ordered bond hearings should be placed on the Petitioners. See ECF No. 15. Accordingly, the Court declines to rule on this issue, which would require a case specific analysis under the factors identified in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976). See Mahmodi et al v Marich et al, No. 25-CV-6762-MAV, 2026 WL 113473, at *4-9 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 15, 2026). Instead, the Court directs that the initial bond hearing shall be provided "as established by existing federal regulations." Da Cunha, 2025 WL 3280575, at *7 (quoting Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 306 (2018) (citing 8 C.F.R. §§ 236.1(d)(1), 1236.1(d)(1)).It is further ORDERED that if such bond hearings are not conducted within ten (10) days of the date of this Order, the implicated Hurtado Petitioner(s) shall be released from custody; and it is furtherORDERED that Respondents shall file a status report no later than March 2, 2026, confirming that each of the Hurtado Petitioners have either been granted a bond hearing within ten (10) days or released from custody in compliance with this Order; and it is furtherORDERED that because the instant Order resolves this matter with respect to the five Hurtado Petitioners, the Court finds that an evidentiary hearing is not warranted, and the restriction on the Hurtado Petitioners transfer outside of the United States is hereby lifted.Given the outstanding severance issues regarding the remaining four petitioners, the Court will issue a subsequent order directing when judgment in favor of Petitioners Richar J. Cuenta Gomez, Segunda M. Moreta Bastidas, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Margoth A. Vichicela Avalos, and Victor M. Medina Gualan should be entered and when this case can be closed.SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/11/26. (NWA) (Entered: 02/11/2026)

#18

Feb 17, 2026

TEXT ORDER. Due to Petitioners' lack of response to Respondents' motion to sever, which was due on February 12, 2026, see ECF Nos. 4, 5, 8, 11, and 12, Petitioners Chan M. Riascos Mejia, Yonny J. Ibanez Mundo, Edison R. Nacima Maila, and Jhonatan M. Cadena Quimbita are severed from this action. The § 2241 habeas claims of Petitioners Mejia, Mundo, Maila, and Quimbita are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling separately.The Clerk's Office shall terminate Chan M. Riascos Mejia, Yonny J. Ibanez Mundo, Edison R. Nacima Maila, and Jhonatan M. Cadena Quimbita as parties to this action. All prior orders with respect to those four petitioners are lifted. The Clerk's Office shall enter judgment in favor of Petitioners Richar J. Cuenta Gomez, Segunda M. Moreta Bastidas, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Margoth A. Vichicela Avalos, and Victor M. Medina Gualan, and shall close this case.SO ORDERED. Signed by Hon. Meredith A. Vacca on 2/17/26. (NWA)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#19

Feb 17, 2026

JUDGMENT in favor of Petitioners Margoth A Vichicela Avalos, Miroslaba Godoy Lugo, Richar J Cuentas Gomez, Segundo M Moreta Bastidas, Victor M Medina Gualan against Respondents. Signed by Clerk on 2/17/26. (JHF) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#20

Feb 24, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re bond hearings for Petitioners Avalos and Guaman. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/24/2026)

#21

Feb 26, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re bond hearing for Petitioner Lugo. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/26/2026)

#22

Feb 27, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball, Todd Lyons, Philip Rhoney re bond hearings for Gomez and Bastidas. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 02/27/2026)