Western District of New York • 6:26-cv-06403

#1

Apr 08, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5784107.), filed by Morteza Tolousadegh. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Graziano, Robert) (Entered: 04/08/2026)

#2

Apr 09, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Morteza Tolousadegh.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 Ceesay v. Kurzdorfer, 781 F. Supp. 3d 137 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), this Court addressed a petition concerning the re-detention of a noncitizen who was subject to a final order of removal and had been released from ICE custody on an order of supervision. Without prior notice, the petitioner was arrested and detained when he appeared for a regularly scheduled check-in with ICE. Id. at 146-47. Moreover, because he was not given an opportunity to be heard nor was the person who revoked his release authorized to do so, the revocation of his order of supervision did not comply with the relevant regulations. Id. at 159-66. Based on the facts presented in that case, the Court ruled for the petitioner, concluding that "because ICE did not follow its own regulations in deciding to re-detain [the petitioner], his due process rights were violated, and he [wa]s entitled to release." Id. at 166.More specifically, the Court found that to properly revoke release, (1) the petitioner must be given an informal interview and opportunity to respond to the reasons for his or her revocation of release, and (2) the Executive Associate Director of ICE must revoke the release, or in the alternative, a district director or another official "delegated the function or authority for a particular geographic district, region, or area" may revoke release—but only after finding that revocation is in the public interest and that the circumstances do not reasonably permit referral of the case to the Executive Associate Director. See id. at 159-66.It appears that the holding of Ceesay may apply to the petitioner in this case. Accordingly, the respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by 4/16/2026 why, in light of that decision, (1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not release the petitioner.SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/9/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 04/09/2026)

Apr 09, 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)

Apr 09, 2026

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

#3

Apr 13, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam A. Khalil on behalf of James Bausch, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 04/13/2026)

#4

Apr 13, 2026

Letter filed by James Bausch, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney in response to Order to Show Cause. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 04/13/2026)

#5

Apr 14, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Morteza Tolousadegh.On 4/9/2026, the Court ordered the government to show cause "why, in light of th[is Court's decision in Ceesay v. Kurzdorfer, 781 F. Supp. 3d 137 (W.D.N.Y. 2025)], (1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not release the petitioner." Docket Item 2. On 4/13/2026, the government filed a response, acknowledging that in Ceesay, this Court "found a revocation of order of supervision of release to be improper if not signed by a district director or executive district director" and conceding that in this case "it does not appear that any order of revocation was issued." Docket Item 4 at 1. Therefore, the government said, "if this Court applies its prior holding in Ceesay..., [Tolousadegh] would be found entitled to relief" and "the government [would ]not succeed." Id. The government also reserved all of its rights, including the right to appeal. Id. The government also argues that if this Court grants Tolousadegh's petition, "a bond hearing is the better approach to outright release." See id. But as the Court held in Ceesay, a petitioner whose order of supervision was not lawfully revoked under 8 C.F.R. § 241.4 is entitled to release under that prior order. See Ceesay, 781 F. Supp. 3d at 159-62, 170; see also Rombot v. Souza, 296 F. Supp. 3d 383, 386-89 (D. Mass. 2017). Accordingly, and for the reasons explained in Ceesay, Tolousadegh's petition, Docket Item 1, is GRANTED. Within 24 hours of the issuance of this order, Tolousadegh must be released under the same conditions in his prior order of supervision. On or before 4/16/2026, the government shall file a status report confirming that Tolousadegh has been released from custody. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/14/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 04/14/2026)

#6

Apr 15, 2026

Letter filed by James Bausch, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney re release. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

#7

Apr 16, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 Letter filed by Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch.The respondents have filed a letter, Docket Item 6, indicating that the petitioner was released in accordance with this Court's order, Docket Item 5. 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 the Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/16/2026. (DDC)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 04/16/2026)

#8

May 13, 2026

JUDGMENT dismissing case. Signed by Clerk of Court on 5/13/2026. (TF) (Entered: 05/13/2026)

#9

Jul 13, 2026

NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 5 Text Order, 8 Judgment by James Bausch, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/13/2026)

Jul 14, 2026

Within 14 days of filing the 9 Notice of Appeal, the appellant is required to electronically file with the District Court an index of filed documents it wishes the Court of Appeals to consider, called Designation of Record on Appeal. After receipt, the Clerk's Office will certify and transmit the index to the Circuit. Pursuant to Local Rule 12.1 of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Forms C and D must be completed within 14 days after the filing of a notice of appeal. Forms C and D can be obtained at: <www.ca2.uscourts.gov>. (JHF)

#10

Jul 27, 2026

DESIGNATION of Record on Appeal by James Bausch, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullins, Philip Rhoney re 9 Notice of Appeal CLERK TO FOLLOW UP (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/27/2026)

#11

Jul 28, 2026

CLERK'S CERTIFICATE/INDEX filed and electronically sent to Court of Appeals. (Attachments: # 1 Index)(RE) (Entered: 07/28/2026)