Southern District of New York • 1:26-cv-00857

#1

Jan 30, 2026

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Document filed by Juan R. Galvis Quinonez..(nb) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#2

Jan 30, 2026

PROPOSED ORDER. Document filed by Juan R. Galvis Quinonez..(nb) Proposed Order to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#3

Jan 30, 2026

PETITIONERS NOTICE OF EMERGENCY MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. Document filed by Juan R. Galvis Quinonez..(nb) (Refer to ECF Rule 13.19(b) and (c) for directions regarding promptly alerting the court to this filing.) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#4

Jan 30, 2026

PRO SE CONSENT TO RECEIVE ELECTRONIC SERVICE. The following party: Paula A. Madrigal consents to receive electronic service via the ECF system. Document filed by Paula A. Madrigal..(nb) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

Jan 30, 2026

Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn is designated to handle matters that may be referred in this case. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (nb)

Jan 30, 2026

Case Designated ECF. (nb)

#5

Feb 02, 2026

STANDING ORDER IN RE CASES FILED BY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS (See 24-MISC-127 Standing Order filed March 18, 2024). To ensure that all cases heard in the Southern District of New York are handled promptly and efficiently, all parties must keep the court apprised of any new contact information. It is a party's obligation to provide an address for service; service of court orders cannot be accomplished if a party does not update the court when a change of address occurs. Accordingly, all self-represented litigants are hereby ORDERED to inform the court of each change in their address or electronic contact information. Parties may consent to electronic service to receive notifications of court filings by email, rather than relying on regular mail delivery. Parties may also ask the court for permission to file documents electronically. Forms, including instructions for consenting to electronic service and requesting permission to file documents electronically, may be found by clicking on the hyperlinks in this order, or by accessing the forms on the courts website, nysd.uscourts.gov/forms. The procedures that follow apply only to cases filed by pro se plaintiffs. If the court receives notice from the United States Postal Service that an order has been returned to the court, or otherwise receives information that the address of record for a self-represented plaintiff is no longer valid, the court may issue an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with this order. Such order will be sent to the plaintiffs last known address and will also be viewable on the court's electronic docket. A notice directing the parties' attention to this order shall be docketed (and mailed to any self-represented party that has appeared and has not consented to electronic service) upon the opening of each case or miscellaneous matter that is classified as pro se in the court's records. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/18/2024) (nb) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#6

Feb 02, 2026

ORDER: The Court, having examined the petition in this action, Dkt. 1, which petitioner filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, hereby ORDERS that: The Clerk of Court shall electronically notify the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York that this Order has issued, including at the following email address: jeffrey.oestericher@usdoj.gov. By Friday, February 6, 2026, the U.S. Attorneys Office shall file an answer or other pleadings in response to the petition. This filing should address, inter alia, whether the facts of this case are materially distinguishable from those in the Court's recent decision in Yao v. Almodovar, ___ F. Supp. 3d. ___, 2025 WL 3653433 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2025). Petitioner may file reply papers, if any, by Tuesday, February 10, 2026. To preserve the Court's jurisdiction pending a ruling on the petition, petitioner shall not be removed from the United States unless and until the Court orders otherwise. See, e.g., Du v. U.S. Dept of Homeland Sec., No. 25 Civ. 644, 2025 WL 1317944, at *1 (D. Conn. Apr. 24, 2025) (enjoining defendants from "removing any Plaintiffs or putative class members from the District of Connecticut, and from deporting them from the United States" because "a federal court may temporarily enjoin immigration authorities from deporting individuals if it preserves the court's jurisdiction over a case or cases"); Ozturk v. Hyde, No. 25 Civ. 10695, 2025 WL 1009445, at *11 (D. Mass. Apr. 4, 2025) ("To allow the Court's resolution of its jurisdiction to decide the Petition, Ozturk shall not be removed from the United States until further Order of this Court." (citation omitted)); Leuthavone v. Salisbury, No. 97 Civ. 556, 2025 WL 1135588, at *2 (D.R.I. Apr. 17, 2025) (granting a stay of removal "to maintain the status quo and preserve the Court's ability to adjudicate the habeas petition"); Khalil v. Joyce, No. 25 Civ. 1935, 2025 WL 750599, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2025) ("To preserve the Court's jurisdiction pending a ruling on the petition, Petitioner shall not be removed from the United States unless and until the Court orders otherwise."); see also Local 1814, Intern. Longshoremen's Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. New York Shipping Ass'n, 965 F.2d 1224, 1237 (2d Cir. 1992) ("Once the district court acquires jurisdiction over the subject matter of, and the parties to, the litigation, the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, authorizes a federal court to protect that jurisdiction." (cleaned up)); Garcia-Izquierdo v. Gartner, No. 4 Civ. 7377, 2004 WL 2093515, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 17, 2004) (under the All Writs Act, a district court "may order that a petitioner's deportation be stayed... when a stay is necessary to preserve the Court's jurisdiction of the case"); cf. Michael v. I.N.S., 48 F.3d 657, 66162 (2d Cir. 1995) (All Writs Act provides federal court of appeals reviewing a final removal order with basis to stay removal). SO ORDERED. Lawrence Catletti answer due 2/6/2026; Marcus Charles answer due 2/6/2026; William Joyce answer due 2/6/2026; Todd Lyons answer due 2/6/2026; Kristi Noem answer due 2/6/2026.( Replies due by 2/10/2026.) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 2/2/2026) (tg) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

#7

Feb 02, 2026

ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, the Court directs the Clerk of Court to attempt to locate pro bono counsel to represent petitioner in this case. The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Court directs the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of this order to petitioner at the address listed on the docket sheet for this action. Petitioner's next friend may receive court documents by email by completing the form, Consent to Electronic Service. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 2/2/2026) (tg) (Entered: 02/02/2026)

Feb 02, 2026

Notice to Court Regarding Proposed Order

Feb 02, 2026

Note Regarding Service on Self-Represented Party

Feb 02, 2026

CASE MANAGEMENT NOTE: For each electronic filing made in a case involving a self-represented party who has not consented to electronic service, the filing party must serve the document on such self-represented party in a manner permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2) (other than through the ECF system) and file proof of service for each document so served. Please see Rule 9.2 of the courts ECF Rules & Instructions for further information..(nb)

Feb 02, 2026

***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING PROPOSED ORDER. Document No. 2 Proposed Order was reviewed and approved as to form. (nd)

#8

Feb 03, 2026

Notice of Appearance

Feb 03, 2026

Mailing Receipt

#9

Feb 04, 2026

Notice of Appearance of Pro Bono Counsel

#10

Feb 04, 2026

Notice of Appearance of Pro Bono Counsel

#11

Feb 05, 2026

Letter

#12

Feb 06, 2026

Reply (non-motion)

#13

Feb 06, 2026

Order

#14

Feb 09, 2026

Letter

#15

Feb 10, 2026

Memo Endorsement

#16

Feb 11, 2026

Judgment - Clerk