District of Massachusetts • 1:25-cv-13322

#1

Nov 07, 2025

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11347165 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Cristiele Ferreira Dos Santos. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Exhibit Exh. 1, # 4 Exhibit Exh. 2)(Cerretani, Gabriela) (Entered: 11/07/2025)

#2

Nov 07, 2025

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Jessica D. Hedges. (SEC) (Entered: 11/07/2025)

#3

Nov 07, 2025

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER CONCERNING SERVICE OF PETITION AND STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL (RN) (Entered: 11/07/2025)

Nov 07, 2025

Notice of Case Assignment

#4

Nov 12, 2025

Notice of Appearance

#5

Nov 18, 2025

General Order 19-02

#6

Nov 20, 2025

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#7

Nov 26, 2025

Chief District Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Having reviewed the Petition of Cristiele Ferreira dos Santos ("Petitioner") for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, D. 1, and Respondents' response to same, D. 6, the Court ALLOWS the Petition insofar as it sought a bond hearing/custody redetermination before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that she is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if her request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial. The Court DISMISSES Respondent U.S. Department of Homeland Security, D. 1 ¶ 13, but all other Respondents remain.Factual Background. Petitioner is a noncitizen from Brazil who has been living in the United States since 2024. D. 1 ¶ 15. Upon her initial entry, she was apprehended by United States Customs and Border Protection, served with a Notice to Appear ("NTA") and released on an I-220A Order of Supervision. Id.; see D. 1-3; D. 1-4. On or about June 11, 2024, Petitioner's removal proceedings were docketed at the Chelmsford Immigration Court. D. 1 ¶ 17. On or about January 29, 2025, Petitioner filed an application for relief with the Chelmsford Immigration Court. Id. Her removal proceedings and application for relief are currently pending. Id. ¶¶ 1, 17. On or about November 7, 2025, Petitioner was detained by the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") and taken into ICE custody. Id. ¶ 19. Petitioner is currently in ICE custody at the Boston Field Office for ICE/Enforcement and Removal Operations ("ERO") in Burlington, MA. Id. ¶ 9.Discussion. As Respondents note in their opposition, D. 6 at 3, "this case is materially similar to Dias De Carvalho and Da Silva." Id. Consistent with this Court's ruling in Dias De Carvalho and Da Silva, the Court concludes that Petitioner's custody is covered by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) (which allows for discretionary determination of custody before an immigration judge) and not 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), as Respondents contend (which provides for mandatory detention for "applicants for admission"), D. 6 at 2-3. Order, Dias De Carvalho v. Hyde, No. 25-cv-12677-DJC (D. Mass. Nov. 4, 2025), D. 14 and cases cited; Da Silva v. Bondi et al., No. 25-cv-12672, 2025 WL 2969163, at *2 (D. Mass. Oct. 21, 2025) and cases cited. That is reflected in Petitioner's NTA stating that she is "an alien present in the United States who has not been admitted or paroled," not "an arriving alien," D. 1-3 at 1, and her Order of Release on Recognizance that was authorized under Section 236 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1226, D. 1-4 at 1. Thus, Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). In their response to the Petitioner's Petition, "Respondents also move to dismiss all Respondents from this action as they are not Petitioner's custodian." D. 6 at 1 n.1. Here, Petitioner names Patricia Hyde, Director of the Boston Field Office for ICE/ERO, Todd Lyons, Acting Director of ICE, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Pamela Bondi, U.S. Attorney General and Kristi Noem, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security as Respondents. D. 1 at 1. As Petitioner alleges that she is currently detained at the Boston Field Office for ICE/ERO, D. 1 ¶ 9, Respondent Patricia Hyde, the Director of the Boston Field Office for ICE/ERO, is Petitioner's immediate custodian. See Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004). Moreover, given that part of the relief sought by Petitioner is a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), D. 1 at 8, and the Court only grants relief as to the bond hearing sought by Petitioner, the Court declines to dismiss the remaining Respondents as they can effectuate the bond hearing relief granted, see Garcia Guaman v. Hyde et al., No. 25-cv-12879-ADB, 2025 WL 3194741, at *1 (D. Mass. Oct. 17, 2025) (noting that "it may be necessary to name additional respondents when the remedy sought through a habeas petition involves procedural rights that cannot be effectuated by the immediate custodian") (citing Bourguignon v. MacDonald, 667 F. Supp. 2d 175, 180 (D. Mass. 2009)); see also Gordon v. Johnson, 991 F. Supp. 2d 258, 260 n.1 (D. Mass. 2013) (noting that "the 'immediate custodian rule' might not apply where the relief sought is a bond hearing and not immediate release"), aff'd sub nom. Castaneda v. Souza, 810 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 2015), with the exception of Respondent U.S. Department of Homeland Security, D. 1 ¶ 13, as generally "a governmental agency [is] not a 'person' to whom we could direct an order" within the meaning of § 2241, see Aristica-Rodriguez v. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Serv., 45 F. App'x 787, 788 (9th Cir. 2002).Accordingly, Petitioner's Petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, D. 1, is ALLOWED insofar as it sought a bond hearing/custody redetermination before an immigration judge under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), which the Court ORDERS within seven (7) days of this Order. Respondents are also ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that she is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The Court further ORDERS Respondents to file a status report within ten (10) days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if her request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial. The Court DISMISSES Respondent U.S. Department of Homeland Security but all other Respondents remain in this case.(LMH) (Entered: 11/26/2025)

#8

Nov 26, 2025

Status Report

Nov 26, 2025

Order