Western District of Pennsylvania • 3:26-cv-00761

#1

Apr 24, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee, including Administrative fee, $5, receipt number APAWDC-9530793), filed by DONIEKO JOEL GREEN. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit ICE LOCATOR, # 3 Exhibit Notice to Appear) (Cardenas, Veronica) (Entered: 04/24/2026)

#2

Apr 27, 2026

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/27/2026. (bjw) (Entered: 04/27/2026)

#3

Apr 27, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE re 2 Case Management Order by DONIEKO JOEL GREEN (Cardenas, Veronica) Modified text to add link on 4/27/2026. (keh) (Entered: 04/27/2026)

Apr 27, 2026

Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand added. (keh)

#5

Apr 28, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Maureen Sheehan-Balchon on behalf of BRIAN MCSHANE, MARKWAYNE MULLIN, LEONARD ODDO. (Sheehan-Balchon, Maureen) (Entered: 04/28/2026)

#6

Apr 28, 2026

SCHEDULING ORDER. Response to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus due by 5/4/2026; Reply due 5/11/2026. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/28/2026. 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: 04/28/2026)

#7

Apr 28, 2026

Appear Pro Hac Vice (for Attorney filers only, Credit Card required)

Apr 28, 2026

Order

#8

Apr 29, 2026

ORDER granting 7 Motion for Veronica Cardenas to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 4/29/26. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (drc) (Entered: 04/29/2026)

Apr 29, 2026

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

#9

May 04, 2026

RESPONSE to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,, filed by LEONARD ODDO. (Sheehan-Balchon, Maureen) (Entered: 05/04/2026)

#10

May 05, 2026

ORDER GRANTING IN PART and DENYING IN PART 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner, a noncitizen detained by Respondents at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center, seeks, inter alia, immediate release from custody or, in the alternative, an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge. The parties agree that the issue before the Court is whether Petitioner is subject to discretionary detention pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1226(a) and therefore entitled to a bond hearing or mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b) and therefore not entitled to a bond hearing. Respondents rely on the BIA's decisions in Matter of Yajure Hurtado, 29 I. & N. Dec. 216 (B.I.A. 2025) and/or Matter of Q. Li, 29 I. & N. Dec. 66 (B.I.A. 2025). The Third Circuit has not yet ruled on this issue and there is a split among several Courts of Appeals. See Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, 166 F.4th 494 (5th Cir. 2026) (noncitizens present in the United States who have not been admitted are "applicants for admission" subject to mandatory detention); see also Avila v. Bondi, No. 25-3248, 2026 WL 819258 (8th Cir. Mar. 25, 2026) (same); but see Cunha v. Freden, No. 25-3141, 2026 WL 1146044, at *2 (2d Cir. Apr. 28, 2026) ("Section 1225(b)(2)(A) does not apply to such noncitizens... who are present in the United States after entering the country without inspection and admission, and who were not apprehended while entering the country or shortly thereafter"); Castanon-Nava v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 161 F.4th 1048, 1060-62 (7th Cir. 2025) (holding that the government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its argument that § 1225(b) governs noncitizens already in the United States whom ICE detained in Chicago). This Court agrees with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. And for the reasons set forth in this Court's prior decisions, the Court concludes that: Petitioner is not required to exhaust administrative remedies as doing so would be futile; and Petitioner is subject to discretionary detention pursuant to § 1226(a) and is therefore entitled to a bond hearing. See, e.g., Zhunio v. Warden et al., No. 3:26-CV-71-CCW, ECF No. 7 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 6, 2026) (Wiegand, J.) (noncitizen who entered the United States without inspection and resided continuously in the interior of the country thereafter subject to discretionary detention pursuant to § 1226(a)); Padilla Ventura v. Rose et al., No. 3:26-cv-65-CCW, ECF No. 13 (W.D. Pa. February 3, 2026) (Wiegand, J.) (same). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED IN PART, as follows: within seven days of this Order, Petitioner must receive an individualized bond hearing conducted by an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226. If Petitioner does not receive a bond hearing by that date, or if the immigration judge declines to conduct a bond hearing based on Matter of Yajure Hurtado, Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner from custody. Within seven days of the immigration judge's decision, the parties must file a joint notice on the docket advising the Court of the outcome of the bond hearing. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition is DENIED in all other respects. In particular, for the reasons set forth in this Court's prior decisions, the Court DENIES Petitioner's request for costs and attorney's fees pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) because Respondents' position, while incorrect, was substantially justified. See Orellana Rivas v. Oddo et al., No. 3:26-cv-246-CCW, ECF No. 14 (W.D. Pa. Mar. 10, 2026) (Wiegand, J.). The Clerk of Court is directed to mark this case CLOSED. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/5/2026. 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: 05/05/2026)

#11

May 05, 2026

FINAL JUDGMENT entered consistent with the above order (ECF No. 10). Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/5/2026. 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: 05/05/2026)

May 05, 2026

Order Dismissing Case

May 05, 2026

Order

#12

May 14, 2026

Enforce

May 14, 2026

w/ 12 BRIEF in Support re 12 Motion to Enforce filed by DONIEKO JOEL GREEN. (keh)

#13

May 15, 2026

NOTICE TO THE COURT - JOINT by LEONARD ODDO (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1) (Sheehan-Balchon, Maureen) (Entered: 05/15/2026)

#14

May 15, 2026

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE 12 Motion to Enforce by Petitioner. Because Petitioner, who bears the burden of proof as movant, has not provided the Court with a recording or transcript of the May 11, 2026 bond hearing held before the immigration judge, the Court is unable to determine whether that hearing had the three essential elements of a fundamentally fair bond hearing under the test set forth by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Ghanem v. Warden Essex Cnty. Corr. Facility, No. 21-1908, 2022 WL 574624, at *2 (3d Cir. Feb. 25, 2022). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 12 Motion to Enforce is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/15/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (drc) (Entered: 05/15/2026)

May 15, 2026

CLERK'S REQUEST FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION re 12 MOTION to Enforce Court's May 10 Order. ERROR: Filer did not attach a Proposed Order as required by LCvR 7. CORRECTION: Filer to submit a proposed order using the Proposed Order event. Filer is to link the Proposed Order to the relevant motion in the event. (keh)

May 15, 2026

Order on Motion to Enforce

#15

May 19, 2026

Enforce

#17

May 19, 2026

BRIEF in Support re 15 Motion to Enforce, filed by DONIEKO JOEL GREEN. (keh) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

#16

May 20, 2026

Order re: 15 MOTION to Enforce by DONIEKO JOEL GREEN. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Respondents shall file their response to the Petitioner's 15 Motion on or before 5/26/2026. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/20/2026. 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: 05/20/2026)

May 20, 2026

Order

May 20, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE OF CORRECTION re 15 MOTION to Enforce . ERROR: Document should have been filed as two separate documents. CORRECTION FOR FUTURE FILINGS: Attorney advised that in the future all documents of that nature are to be filed separately. Clerk docketed Brief in Support. THIS MESSAGE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NO FURTHER ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FILING AT ISSUE. (keh)

#18

May 26, 2026

RESPONSE to Motion re 15 MOTION to Enforce filed by LEONARD ODDO. (Sheehan-Balchon, Maureen) (Entered: 05/26/2026)

#19

May 27, 2026

ORDER DENYING 15 Motion to Enforce by Petitioner. Petitioner moves to enforce this Court's 10 Order directing Respondents to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge ("IJ"). Following the Court's 10 Order, Petitioner received a bond hearing on 5/11/2026, at which the IJ denied bond. Petitioner now asserts that bond hearing violated his due process rights and asks for this Court to order his immediate release from custody. Federal courts "lack jurisdiction to review any discretionary determinations underlying the IJ's bond decision," and may only "review whether the bond hearing was fundamentally unfair" such that it violates the detainee's due process rights. Ghanem v. Warden Essex Cnty. Corr. Facility, No. 21-1908, 2022 WL 574624, at *2 (3d Cir. Feb. 25, 2022); see also Quinteros v. Warden Pike Cnty. Corr. Facility, 784 F. App'x 75, 78 (3d Cir. 2019). The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has advised that a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226 is "fundamentally fair," and thus satisfies due process, if three essential elements are present: (1) factfinding based on a record produced before the decisionmaker and disclosed to the detainee; (2) the detainee is allowed to make arguments on his or her behalf; and (3) the IJ makes an individualized determination of the detainee's interests. Ghanem, 2022 WL 574624 at *2; see also Quinteros, 784 F. App'x at 78. Accordingly, this Court's review of the bond hearing is limited to considering whether the hearing was fundamentally fair under Ghanem. After reviewing the transcript of the hearing, the Court is satisfied that that the hearing was fundamentally fair. First, the IJ's factfinding was based on a record produced before the IJ and disclosed to Petitioner. Second, the IJ gave Petitioner's counsel the opportunity to present arguments. Finally, the IJ made an individualized determination of Petitioner's interests. The bond hearing had each of the essential elements of a fundamentally fair bond hearing and complied with Petitioner's due process rights. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's 15 Motion to Enforce IS DENIED. Signed by Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand on 5/27/2026. 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: 05/27/2026)

May 27, 2026

Order on Motion to Enforce