Eastern District of New York • 1:26-cv-02055

#1

Apr 07, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filing fee $ 5, receipt number ANYEDC-20085928, filed by MANUEL ALEJANDRO ZHAGUI SAQUICELA. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover sheet, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit Exhibit F) (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

#2

Apr 07, 2026

This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (LJ) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

#3

Apr 07, 2026

Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order to Enjoin Respondents from Transferring Petitioner From the Jurisdiction by Manuel Alejandro Zhagui Saquicela. (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

Apr 07, 2026

Case Assigned to Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (CV)

Apr 07, 2026

Order to Show Cause (463)

Apr 07, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Apr 07, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Respondents are directed to SHOW CAUSE, on or before April 10, 2026, why the petition for a writ of habeas corpus (the "Petition") should be denied or indicating whether the Petition is controlled by this Court's prior rulings on the petitions in Caivanagua Sanchez v. Genalo, et al., No. 26-cv-476 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2026), Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo et al, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo et al, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026). Should the Court require a reply, it will inform Petitioner in a subsequent order. Petitioner shall not be transferred except to a facility within this District, the Southern District of New York, or the District of New Jersey absent further order of this Court in light of Petitioner's interests in participating in further proceedings before this Court and maintaining adequate access to legal counsel through these proceedings. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 4/7/2026. (NCW)

#4

Apr 08, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Manuel Alejandro Zhagui Saquicela As to All Respondents (Musa-Obregon, S.) (Entered: 04/08/2026)

Apr 08, 2026

Order to Show Cause (463)

Apr 08, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: In addition to responding to the Court's Order to Show Cause, dated April 7, 2026, Respondents are directed to SHOW CAUSE, on or before April 10, 2026, why Petitioner's emergency motion for a temporary restraining order 3 (the "TRO") should be denied or indicating whether the TRO is controlled by this Court's prior rulings on the petitions in Caivanagua Sanchez v. Genalo, et al., No. 26-cv-476 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2026), Estrada Alfaro v. Genalo et al, No. 26-cv-761 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 10, 2026), and Singh v. Genalo et al, No. 26-cv-937 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 17, 2026). Should the Court require a reply, it will inform Petitioner in a subsequent order. As noted in the Court's Order dated April 7, 2026, Petitioner shall not be transferred except to a facility within this District, the Southern District of New York, or the District of New Jersey absent further order of this Court in light of Petitioner's interests in participating in further proceedings before this Court and maintaining adequate access to legal counsel through these proceedings. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 4/8/2026. (NCW)

#5

Apr 10, 2026

Extension of Time to File Document

Apr 12, 2026

ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Respondents' motion for an extension of time to further respond to the Court's April 7, 2026 Order to Show Cause, which explains that their request for additional time is made in order to allow Respondents to provide the Court with a transcript from a January 21, 2026 bond hearing that Petitioner received before an immigration judge. Respondents' motion for an extension of time 5 is GRANTED in part. Respondents shall file the transcript from the January 21, 2026 bond hearing on or before April 22, 2026. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 4/12/2026. (NCW)

Apr 12, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File

#6

Apr 13, 2026

Response to Order to Show Cause

#7

Apr 17, 2026

Letter

#8

Apr 17, 2026

Reconsideration

#9

Apr 17, 2026

Letter

Apr 17, 2026

Order on Motion for TRO

Apr 24, 2026

Status Report Order

#10

May 07, 2026

Response in Opposition to Motion

#11

May 07, 2026

Reply in Support

May 15, 2026

ORDER: A court may grant a motion for reconsideration where there is "an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice." Vasquez v. Rockland Cnty., 2021 WL 5286676, at *2 (2d Cir. Nov. 15, 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). In making this motion 8, Petitioner does not point to a change in the controlling law, new evidence, or a need to correct clear error or manifest injustice. Specifically, Petitioner's does not argue that the Courts determination that the claims in the present Petition could have been or were presented in the prior New Jersey petition was erroneous. The same is true for the Courts determination that the proper procedure for challenging the relief provided by the District of New Jersey is to appeal the decision rendered with respect to the New Jersey petition. Instead, Petitioner argues primarily that he was denied a fair opportunity to be heard because the Court issued its Order denying the habeas Petition and emergency Motion for TRO before Petitioner filed his reply to Respondents opposition. In making this argument, Petitioner does not point to, and this Court is not aware of, authority that grants Petitioner a reply submission as a matter of right. And, this Court, in its April 07, 2026 Order to Show Cause, had notified Petitioner that "should" it require a reply that it would inform Petitioner in a subsequent order. At the time the Order denying the Petition and emergency Motion for TRO was issued, the Court did not require such a reply and used its discretion to rule on the existing record. The Courts decision to rule on the existing record does not fall within the narrow and extraordinary set of circumstances Rule 60(b) is designed to address. Accordingly, Petitioners Motion for Reconsideration and Vacatur 8 is DENIED. Ordered by Judge LaShann DeArcy Hall on 5/15/2026. (CG)

May 15, 2026

Order on Motion for Reconsideration