Western District of Pennsylvania • 3:26-cv-00476

#1

Mar 19, 2026

Remark: Amended Habeas Petition lodged without Motion for In Forma Pauperis or payment of filing fee (Attachments: # 1 Envelope) (elt) (Entered: 03/20/2026)

Mar 19, 2026

Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand added. (elt)

#2

Mar 23, 2026

Case Management Order

#3

Mar 24, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by David Lew on behalf of PAM BONDI, KRISTI NOEM. (Lew, David) (Entered: 03/24/2026)

#4

Mar 24, 2026

SCHEDULING ORDER. Response to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus due by 3/30/2026; Reply due 4/8/2026. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 3/24/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bjw) (Entered: 03/24/2026)

Mar 24, 2026

Order

#5

Mar 26, 2026

DEFICIENCY ORDER. The habeas petition was filed without the $5 filing fee or a completed IFP application to waive the fee. The case will be administratively closed until the Clerk of Court receives the filing fee or completed IFP application. More information can be found at the Court's website: https://www.pawd.uscourts.gov/. Respondents' deadline to respond to the petition is hereby VACATED. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 3/26/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bjw) (Entered: 03/26/2026)

Mar 26, 2026

Deficiency Order AND Order for Administrative Case Closing

#6

Apr 01, 2026

Filing fee: $5, receipt number 300000975 (elt) (Entered: 04/01/2026)

#7

Apr 06, 2026

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (for Clerk of Court personnel only)

#8

Apr 06, 2026

SCHEDULING ORDER. Response to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus due by 4/9/2026; Reply due 4/17/2026. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/6/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bjw) (Entered: 04/06/2026)

Apr 06, 2026

Order

#9

Apr 08, 2026

Dismiss

#10

Apr 09, 2026

Order re: 9 MOTION to Dismiss re 7 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by PAM BONDI, KRISTI NOEM. IT IS HERE BY ORDERED THAT the Petitioner shall file his response the Respondents' 9 Motion on or before 4/20/2026. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/9/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bjw) (Entered: 04/09/2026)

Apr 09, 2026

Order

#11

May 08, 2026

ORDER GRANTING 9 Motion to Dismiss filed by Respondents. In the 9 Motion, Respondents move to dismiss the pro se 7 Petition as premature or moot. Petitioner, a noncitizen detained by Respondents at Moshannon Valley Processing Center, seeks, inter alia, immediate release from custody or, in the alternative, an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge. Petitioner alleges that he is subject to discretionary detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1226(a) as opposed to mandatory detention pursuant to § 1225(b)(2), and therefore entitled to a bond hearing. See ECF No. 7. Respondents argue that Petitioner is subject to a final order of removal and that he is therefore subject to mandatory detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1) and not entitled to a bond hearing. ECF No. 9 at 1. Petitioner did not respond to the 9 Motion despite being ordered to do so. ECF No. 10. The Supreme Court has made clear that "final orders of removal may not be reviewed in district courts, even via habeas corpus, and may be reviewed only in the courts of appeals." Nasrallah v. Barr, 590 U.S. 573, 57980 (2020). Specifically, District Courts lack jurisdiction over both the challenge to a final removal order itself, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(5), and claims that "aris[e] from any action taken or proceeding brought to remove an alien[,]" 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9). E.O.H.C. v. Sec'y U.S. Dep't of Homeland Security, 950 F.3d 177, 184 (3d Cir. 2020). But, District Courts do have jurisdiction "when aliens seek relief that courts cannot meaningfully provide alongside review of a final order of removal." E.O.H.C, 950 F 3d at 186. However, alleging an injury that cannot be remedied later through a petition for review is insufficient to establish jurisdiction in the District Court, as the "claim must raise legal or factual questions that a court of appeals will not later be able to review meaningfully[.]" Khalil v. President of U.S., No. 25-2162, 2026 WL 111933, at *9 (3d Cir. 2026). Here, Petitioner's claims arise from an action or proceeding to remove him, and therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to order Petitioner's release. Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondents' 9 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, and the 7 Petition is DISMISSED.. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/8/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bjw) (Entered: 05/08/2026)

May 08, 2026

Order on Motion to Dismiss