District of Massachusetts • 1:25-cv-13048

#1

Oct 17, 2025

First PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11305754 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Isaias Ramirez Ramirez. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Category Form)(Okoye, Ogor) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

#2

Oct 17, 2025

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Angel Kelley assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Jennifer C. Boal. (CEH) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

#3

Oct 17, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ORDER entered. Order Concerning Service of Petition and Stay of Transfer of Removal. (CEH) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

#4

Oct 17, 2025

Copy re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), 3 Service Order - 2241 Petition emailed to AUSA Julien Mundele, Rayford Farquhar, Elona Toro, and USAMA Civil Process on 10/17/2025 at 4:36 PM (CEH) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

#5

Oct 17, 2025

Copy re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), 3 Service Order - 2241 Petition mailed to All Respondents on 10/17/2025. (CEH) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

#6

Oct 17, 2025

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (CEH) (Entered: 10/17/2025)

Oct 17, 2025

Copy Mailed

Oct 17, 2025

Notice of Case Assignment

#7

Oct 20, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ORDER entered. Standing Order Regarding Motion Practice. (CEH) (Entered: 10/20/2025)

#8

Oct 20, 2025

Notice of Appearance

#9

Oct 20, 2025

Extension of Time to File Response/Reply

#10

Oct 21, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered GRANTING 9 MOTION for Extension of Time to October 22, 2025 to File Response/Reply. Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Antone Moniz, Kristi Noem, Sirce Owen, and David Wesling answer due 10/22/2025. (CEH) (Entered: 10/21/2025)

#11

Oct 21, 2025

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

Oct 21, 2025

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

#12

Oct 23, 2025

Notice - Other

#13

Oct 23, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Court ACKNOWLEDGES receipt of Respondents' Notice of Transfer and Voluntary Departure [Dkt. 12] (the "Notice"), which reports that Petitioner Isaias Ramirez Ramirez appeared before the Chelmsford Immigration Court, applied for voluntary departure, and waived appeal of all issues. The Government has notified the Court of its intention to remove Petitioner to El Salvador and contends that the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [Dkt. 1] is moot and should be denied. Petitioner is DIRECTED to advise the Court in writing, by no later than 1:00 p.m. on Friday, October 24, 2025 whether he seeks to withdraw the Petition and voluntarily depart the United States. If Petitioner contends that the Petition is not moot, he must explain why not and identify any relief he seeks. Failure to respond may result in dismissal of the Petition as moot. SO ORDERED.(MAL) (Entered: 10/23/2025)

Oct 23, 2025

Order

#14

Oct 24, 2025

Notice - Other

#15

Oct 24, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Court hereby ORDERS that counsel for the parties shall appear for a status conference on Monday, October 27, 2025, at 12:00 p.m. to address whether the Petition remains justiciable in light of the Government’s notice of voluntary departure and Petitioner’s representations regarding a motion to reopen in immigration court. Counsel for each party must be prepared to discuss the current status of the immigration court proceedings, including any pending motions, the Government’s plans, if any, to effectuate removal or transfer, and whether interim relief is necessary to preserve the Court’s ability to adjudicate the Petition. The United States, and any federal, state, or local official acting on its behalf, is hereby DIRECTED to abstain from transferring, removing, deporting, or otherwise effectuating the Petitioner’s departure from the District of Massachusetts for a period of ninety-six (96) hours from the time this Electronic Order is docketed. The Government is further ORDERED to file a concise status statement, not to exceed five pages, by 9:00 a.m. on Monday, October 27, 2025, stating its position on mootness, the status of any removal or departure plans, and any operational steps already taken or planned that could affect compliance with this Order. Petitioner may file a one-page reply by 11:00 a.m. on Monday, October 27, 2025. SO ORDERED.(CEH) (Entered: 10/24/2025)

#16

Oct 24, 2025

Set/Reset Hearings: Status Conference set for 10/27/2025 12:00 PM in Courtroom 8 (In person only) before District Judge Angel Kelley. (CEH) (Entered: 10/24/2025)

Oct 24, 2025

Order

#17

Oct 26, 2025

Continue

#18

Oct 26, 2025

Status Report

#19

Oct 26, 2025

Opposition to Motion

#20

Oct 26, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Petitioner's motion to continue the status conference [Dkt. 17]. The Court CONTINUES the status conference to Tuesday, October 28, 2025, at 12:00 P.M. and ORDERS that the conference will be held virtually. Counsel of record or substitute counsel for the parties must participate and be prepared to address the Court. SO ORDERED. Status Conference set for 10/28/2025 12:00 PM in Remote Proceeding : Boston before District Judge Angel Kelley. (MAL) (Entered: 10/26/2025)

Oct 26, 2025

Order on Motion to Continue

#21

Oct 28, 2025

Appear Pro Hac Vice

#22

Oct 28, 2025

Electronic Clerk's Notes for proceedings held before District Judge Angel Kelley: Status Conference held on 10/28/2025 by video conference.Case called; the Court heard from the parties on the matter. Further order to issue. (Court Reporter: Linda Walsh at lwalshsteno@gmail.com.)(Attorneys present: Burns, Yen) (MAL) (Entered: 10/28/2025)

Oct 28, 2025

Status Conference

#23

Oct 29, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. On May 27, 2025, Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested Petitioner during an enforcement operation. Petitioner requested a bond redetermination under 8 U.S.C. § 1236, which an immigration judge denied on September 11, 2025 on the ground that he was subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). Petitioner filed the instant Petition on October 17, 2025, alleging, among other things, that he was misclassified and should have been eligible for bond under § 1226. On October 21, 2025, Respondents filed a response acknowledging this Court’s decision in Amaya Sanchez v. Moniz concluding that noncitizens arrested while residing in the United States ordinarily fall within § 1226(a)’s discretionary detention regime rather than § 1225(b)(2), and conceding that this case is materially indistinguishable from Amaya Sanchez. Also on October 21, 2025, Petitioner appeared before the immigration court and applied for voluntary departure. The immigration judge determined him removable, granted his voluntary departure “with safeguards” (a designation that preserves detention), and Petitioner waived appeal. On October 23, 2025, Respondents notified this Court of the voluntary departure order and their intent to effectuate removal. The Court directed Petitioner to state whether he intended to withdraw his Petition in light of his application for voluntary departure; he filed a notice that he intends to proceed and represented that a motion to reopen has been filed in immigration court to remove the “with safeguards” designation.The Court held a status conference on October 28, 2025 to address justiciability. Petitioner’s counsel argued the immigration judge’s October 21st order was not final under 8 C.F.R. § 1241.1(f); the Court concludes otherwise. Under 8 C.F.R. § 1241.1(b), an order of removal issued at the conclusion of proceedings becomes final upon waiver of appeal, and Petitioner waived appeal when he accepted a voluntary departure. Nevertheless, Petitioner remains in custody and his motion to reopen is pending before the immigration court. The question whether § 1225 or § 1226 governs Petitioner’s detention is outcome determinative for bond eligibility, and this Court’s prior interpretation of § 1226(a) in Amaya Sanchez is applicable to this case. The immigration judge granting Petitioner’s application for voluntary departure does not appear to have had the benefit of this Court’s § 1226(a) interpretation at the time the “with safeguards” designation was ordered. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the matter is REFERRED to the Chelmsford Immigration Court to reevaluate whether petitioner is eligible for a voluntary departure bond or other release on bond. The United States, and any federal, state, or local official acting on its behalf, is DIRECTED to abstain from transferring, removing, deporting, or otherwise effectuating Petitioner’s departure from the District of Massachusetts until the immigration court conducts the bond redetermination hearing. The Court further ORDERS that the parties shall file a one-page status report within two business days after the bond determination stating the disposition and any further relief or action requested from this Court. The Clerk shall transmit a copy of this Electronic Order to the Chelmsford Immigration Court, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, and counsel of record. SO ORDERED.(CEH) (Entered: 10/29/2025)

Oct 29, 2025

Order

#24

Nov 03, 2025

Reconsideration

#25

Nov 03, 2025

Reconsideration

Nov 03, 2025

Reconsideration

#30

Nov 04, 2025

Filing fee/payment: $ 125.00, receipt number 13488 for 21 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice (CEH) (Entered: 12/04/2025)

#26

Nov 06, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Petitioner is DIRECTED to file a response to Respondents' Motion for Reconsideration [Dkt. 25], if any, no later than 5:00 P.M. on Monday, November 10, 2025. SO ORDERED.(MAL) (Entered: 11/06/2025)

#27

Nov 06, 2025

STATUS REPORT by Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Antone Moniz, Kristi Noem, Sirce Owen, David Wesling. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Yen, Shawna) (Entered: 11/06/2025)

Nov 06, 2025

Order

#28

Nov 07, 2025

Response to Motion

#29

Nov 26, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Court has considered the Respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration and Request for Clarification of the Court’s October 29, 2025 Electronic Order [Dkt. 25], the parties’ submissions, and the record in this case. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion for reconsideration and vacates the portion of its October 29, 2025 Order that referred this matter to the Chelmsford Immigration Court for a bond reevaluation.This case began as a petition for habeas corpus challenging the lawfulness of Petitioner’s detention and the denial of bond. [Dkt. 1] (the “Petition”). While the Petition was pending, the procedural posture of the matter changed materially. Petitioner requested voluntary departure with safeguards and, in doing so, waived his right to appeal. [see Dkt. 182]. Petitioner then filed a motion to reopen his removal proceedings in the Immigration Court during the voluntary departure period. The Immigration Court’s October 21, 2025, order expressly advised that filing a motion to reopen during the voluntary departure period would terminate the grant of voluntary departure grant and allow the alternate order of removal to take effect immediately [seeid.]. The Immigration Court has since denied Petitioner’s motion to reopen [Dkt. 271].Under these circumstances, the Court finds that Petitioner is now subject to a final order of removal. The voluntary departure request, the waiver of appeal, and the subsequent motion to reopen together altered Petitioner’s status and the procedural posture of this litigation. Because a final order of removal is now in effect, Petitioner’s detention is governed by the mandatory detention provision of 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2). The question whether Petitioner’s detention should be governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1225 or § 1226, which was central to the Court’s earlier remand on the AmayaSanchez issue, is therefore no longer outcome determinative for bond eligibility in this forum. The Court further finds that Immigration Court proceedings closed upon entry of the final removal order and that authority to reopen or to conduct further immigration proceedings rests with the Immigration Judge and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (“EOIR”). This Court lacks authority to direct the Immigration Court to reopen proceedings or to conduct a bond redetermination where, as here, the removal order is final and the Immigration Court has denied reopening. To the extent the Court’s October 29, 2025 Order referred the matter to the Chelmsford Immigration Court for reevaluation of bond eligibility, that referral is vacated.Accordingly, the Respondents’ Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED. The Court finds that Petitioner is subject to a final order of removal and therefore to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2). The Court lifts its prior stay of transfer to the extent necessary to permit Respondents to effectuate transfer and removal consistent with federal law and agency practice. This lifting of the stay is qualified: if, prior to removal, the Immigration Court reopens Petitioner’s removal proceedings or EOIR otherwise issues an order staying removal, Respondents shall comply with that decision and shall promptly notify this Court. The Court clarifies that vacatur of the referral does not preclude Petitioner from pursuing any available administrative remedies before EOIR, nor does it limit EOIR’s authority to reopen proceedings in accordance with its rules and regulations. If EOIR reopens proceedings or otherwise alters Petitioner’s status, the parties may return to this Court as appropriate.The Clerk shall enter this Order on the docket and terminate the referral issued in the October 29, 2025 Electronic Order. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce compliance with this Order and to address any subsequent filings that may arise from actions taken by EOIR or the parties. SO ORDERED. (CEH) (Entered: 11/26/2025)

Nov 26, 2025

Order on Motion for Reconsideration

#31

Dec 04, 2025

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered GRANTING 21 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Added Mathew Elliot Burns. Attorneys admitted Pro Hac Vice must have an individual upgraded PACER account, not a shared firm account, to electronically file in the District of Massachusetts. Counsel may need to link their CM/ECF account to their upgraded individual pacer account. Instructions on how to link CM/ECF accounts to upgraded pacer account can be found at https://www.mad.uscourts.gov/caseinfo/nextgen-current-pacer-accounts.htm#link-account. (CEH) (Entered: 12/04/2025)

Dec 04, 2025

Order on Motion for Leave to Appear

Dec 04, 2025

Filing Fee/Payment Received

#32

Jan 08, 2026

Status Report

#33

Feb 11, 2026

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. On January 8, 2026, Respondents provided a Status Report indicating that Petitioner voluntarily departed under safeguards on December 10, 2025. [Dkt. 32]. As a result, absent objection within the next seven (7) calendar days, the Court will terminate the suit.(CEH) (Entered: 02/11/2026)

Feb 11, 2026

Order

#34

Feb 19, 2026

Order Dismissing Case