Western District of New York • 6:26-cv-06342

#1

Mar 24, 2026

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5763388.), filed by Wimer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 2)(Barnaby, Daneal) (Entered: 03/24/2026)

#2

Mar 25, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan So that the petitioner can fully participate in these proceedings and maintain adequate access to legal counsel, the respondents are enjoined from transferring the petitioner to any district outside the Western District of New York. See Perez y Perez v. Noem, 2025 WL 1908284, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 13, 2025) (collecting cases). In Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), this Court held that noncitizens who are present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled are not subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) but instead are subject to detention under section 1226. The Court further held "that constitutional due process requires the government to bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the individual is either a danger to the community or a flight risk even at an initial bond hearing under section 1226(a)." Id. at 598. And in Cabrera Martinez v. Marich, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2025 WL 3771228 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 31, 2025), this Court held that detention of noncitizens who have remained in the country following expiration of parole is under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not section 1225. It appears that the holding of Alvarez Ortiz and/or Cabrera Martinez may apply to the petitioner in this case. Accordingly, the respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before 4/1/2026, why, in light of one or both of those decisions, (1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not order that the petitioner receive a bond hearing at which the government bears the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk and at which the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 3/25/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 03/25/2026)

Mar 25, 2026

Case assigned to Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Notification to chambers of online civil opening. (MMG)

Mar 25, 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. (MMG)

#3

Mar 27, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam A. Khalil on behalf of Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 03/27/2026)

#4

Mar 27, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 2 Text Order,,,,,,,, filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 03/27/2026)

#5

Mar 27, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan On 3/25/2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of its decision in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579, (W.D.N.Y. 2025), "(1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not order that the petitioner receive a bond hearing at which the government bears the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk and at which the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay." Docket Item 2 . In response, the "[r]espondents acknowledge[d] that this Court's prior rulings [including Alvarez Ortiz] concerning similar challenges to the government policy or practice at issue in this case, and the common question of law between this case and those rulings, would control the result in this case should the Court adhere to its legal reasoning in those prior decisions." Docket Item 4 at 1. The respondents have reserved all rights, including the right to appeal, and this Court appreciates their efforts "to conserve judicial and party resources" by not rehashing issues that this Court already has decided. See id. Accordingly, for the reasons explained in Alvarez Ortiz, this Court GRANTS the petition and ORDERS the respondents to provide the petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven calendar days of the date of this order. At that hearing, the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk. At that bond hearing, the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. If the respondents fail to provide such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release the petitioner. On or before 4/6/2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that the petitioner has either been granted a bond hearing in compliance with this order or released from custody. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 3/27/2026.(ZHM) (Entered: 03/27/2026)

#6

Apr 06, 2026

Letter filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem re bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 04/06/2026)

#7

Apr 07, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 Letter filed by Kristi Noem, Tammy Marich, Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons The respondents have filed a letter, Docket Item 6, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 5, but found that the government met its burden on both danger and risk of flight. If the petitioner believes there are any further issues properly before this Court, the petitioner may show cause within 14 days of this order. If the petitioner does not show cause why issues remain before this Court within 14 days, the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/7/2026. (ZHM)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 04/07/2026)

#8

Apr 17, 2026

MOTION to Enforce Judgment by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(Barnaby, Daneal) (Entered: 04/17/2026)

#9

Apr 20, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. Response due by 4/27/2026. Reply due by 5/4/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/20/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 04/20/2026)

#10

Apr 27, 2026

Letter filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem in opposition to Motion to Enforce (ECF No. 8). (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 04/27/2026)

#11

May 04, 2026

REPLY to Response to Motion re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. (Barnaby, Daneal) (Entered: 05/04/2026)

#12

May 08, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. Virtual Oral Argument set for 5/19/2026 at 9:30 AM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. PLEASE NOTE: The proceeding described herein will be held remotely. Dial-in instructions will be emailed directly to the parties. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 5/8/2026. (CMD) (Entered: 05/08/2026)

#13

May 19, 2026

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo: Oral Argument re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan held on 5/19/2026. Court ordered that this proceeding is not to be recorded, or taped in any way. If someone does record it, they will be found in contempt of court. After hearing from parties, the Court reserved decision. Appearances. For petitioner: Daneal A. Barnaby. For respondents: AUSA Adam A. Khalil. (Court Reporter Laurel Tubbs.) (CMD) (Entered: 05/19/2026)

#14

May 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. After careful consideration, the Court DENIES the petitioner's motion to enforce because the Court finds no indication that the immigration judge ("IJ") failed to follow this Court's order. That being said, as this Court expressed at oral argument, the IJ's denial of the petitioner's request to testify gives this Court significant concern. Accordingly, this Court's denial of the motion to enforce is without prejudice to the petitioner's filing another motion within 30 days of the date of this order challenging, on due process grounds, his inability to testify at the bond hearing. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 5/26/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 05/26/2026)

#15

Jun 16, 2026

Letter filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem with bond hearing transcript. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/16/2026)

#16

Jun 18, 2026

Letter filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem re final order of removal and lifting of order enjoining stay. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/18/2026)

#17

Jun 18, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 16 Letter filed by Kristi Noem, Tammy Marich, Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons The stay of transfer in this action will be lifted at 12:00 PM on 6/22/2026 unless the petitioner SHOWS CAUSE before then as to why the Court has the authority to keep it in place. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/18/2026.(ZHM) (Entered: 06/18/2026)

#18

Jun 22, 2026

TEXT ORDER: On 6/18/2026, this Court told the parties that the stay of transfer in this action would be lifted unless the petitioner showed cause "as to why the Court has the authority to keep it in place." Docket Item 17 . The petitioner has not responded to that order, and the time to do so now has expired. See id. Accordingly, the Court hereby VACATES its order staying transfer, Docket Item 2 . SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/22/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 06/22/2026)

#19

Jun 26, 2026

MOTION to discharge counsel, proceed pro se and MOTION to Voluntarily Dismiss Petition, by Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. (Attachments: # 1 envelope)(TF) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#20

Jun 26, 2026

Letter filed by Steven Kurzdorfer, Todd Lyons, Tammy Marich, Kristi Noem consenting to dismissal and taking no position on remainder of requests. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#21

Jul 02, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In light of the representations made in the petitioner's submission, Docket Item 19, and the position taken by the respondents, Docket Item 20, the Court GRANTS the petitioner's requests to proceed pro se and dismiss his petition, Docket Item 19 . The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/2/2026. (ZHM)This was mailed to: the petitioner at the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, 4250 Federal Drive, Batavia, NY 14020.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 07/02/2026)

#22

Jul 14, 2026

Mail Returned as Undeliverable, unable to forward. 21 Text Order, Terminate Motions sent to Wilmer Benjamin Mayancela Dutan. (DMK) (Entered: 07/16/2026)