Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-00897

#1

May 04, 2026

PETITION for Write of Habeas Corpus filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega.(DDS) (Entered: 05/05/2026)

#2

May 04, 2026

MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega.(DDS) (Entered: 05/05/2026)

May 04, 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. (DDS)

#3

May 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega.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 da Cunha v. Freden, --- F.4th ---, 2026 WL 1146044 (2d Cir. Apr. 28, 2026), the Second Circuit 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. 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. Additionally, this Court held in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2025 WL 3085032 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 4, 2025), "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 *12. It appears that the holdings of da Cunha v. Freden, 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 5/12/2026, why, in light 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 5/5/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim (Entered: 05/05/2026)

#4

May 11, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance of Government Attorney: Adam A. Khalil, appearing on behalf of Michael Ball. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

#5

May 11, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 3 Text Order,,,,,,,,, filed by Michael Ball. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

#6

May 11, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 5 Reply/Response (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

#7

May 12, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega, 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. On 5/5/2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of the Second Circuit's decision in da Cunha v. Freden, --- F.4th ---, 2026 WL 1146044 (2d Cir. Apr. 28, 2026), and this Court's decision in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, --- F.Supp.3d ---, 2025 WL 3085032 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 4, 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 3. In response, the "[r]espondents acknowledge[d] that this Court's prior rulings," including Alvarez Ortiz, "concern[ed] 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 5 at 1. The respondents have reserved all rights, and this Court appreciates their efforts "to conserve judicial and party resources" by not rehashing issues that this Court and the Second Circuit already have 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 5/20/2026, 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. The petitioner also has moved to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") (that is, as a person who should have the prepayment of the ordinary filing fee waived because he cannot afford it). See Docket Item 2. The filing fee for a petition for a writ of habeas corpus is $5.00. 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). Whenever an individual submits a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the individual must either (a) pay the filing fee or (b) submit a motion to proceed IFP. As required by statute, an immigration detainee that seeks to proceed IFP must submit an affidavit or affirmation detailing the petitioner's assets and liabilities and swearing under oath the petitioner is unable to pay the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1); see also id. § 1915(h) (Prison Litigation Reform Act's other requirements for proceeding IFP only apply to a "prisoner... accused of, convicted of, sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for... violations of criminal law"). Here, the petitioner has submitted the required affirmation swearing that he is unable to pay the filing fee. See Docket Item 2. Therefore, the Court GRANTS the petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, id.SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 5/12/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim. Modified on 5/12/2026 to indicate that the order was mailed to both the petitioner and Kelly W. Sackheim. (DDC) (Entered: 05/12/2026)

#8

May 20, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball re bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

#9

May 20, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 8 Letter (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

#10

May 21, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 8 Letter filed by Michael Ball.The respondent has filed a letter, Docket Item 8, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 7, but found that the government met its burden on 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 5/21/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 05/21/2026)

#11

Jun 01, 2026

RESPONSE to re 10 Text Order re 8 Letter filed by Michael Ball filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (DDS) (Entered: 06/01/2026)

#12

Jun 01, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 11 Reply/Response filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega.The petitioner has filed a letter arguing that his bond hearing was "not in compliance" with this Court's order of 5/12/2026, Docket Item 7 . See Docket Item 11 at 1 (capitalization altered). The Court construes the petitioner's letter as a motion to enforce this Court's prior order, Docket Item 7 . The government shall respond to the petitioner's letter, construed as a motion to enforce, by 6/8/2026. The petitioner may reply by 6/19/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/1/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim. (Entered: 06/01/2026)

#13

Jun 02, 2026

NOTICE OF APPEAL from a Decision of an Immigration Judge by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (DDS) (Entered: 06/02/2026)

#14

Jun 03, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 13 Notice filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. The pro se petitioner, Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega, appears to have sent a Notice of Appeal from a Decision of an Immigration Judge, Docket Item 13, to the Court instead of the Board of Immigration Appeals. The Clerk of the Court shall mail the notice back to Gonzalez Ortega at the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/3/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 06/03/2026)

#15

Jun 03, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 11 Reply/Response filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. The government shall file a transcript of the petitioner's bond hearing with its response to the petitioner's letter, which this Court has construed as a motion to enforce. See Docket Item 12. The government's response deadline therefore is extended until 6/15/2026. The petitioner may reply by 6/26/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/3/2026. (RFI)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim. (Entered: 06/03/2026)

Jun 03, 2026

Remark: The Clerk mailed the Notice of Appeal from a Decision of an Immigration Judge re 13 back to the petitioner, Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega A-245-527-034, Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, 4250 Federal Dr., Batavia, NY 14020. (DDS)

#16

Jun 04, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball re motion to enforce. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#17

Jun 04, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 16 Letter (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#18

Jun 04, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 11 Motion to Enforce filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. On 5/4/2026, the petitioner, Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in connection with his immigration custody. Docket Item 1 . On 5/12/2026, this Court granted Gonzalez Ortega's petition and ordered the government to "provide [him] with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge." Docket Item 7 . The Court's order specified that "the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that [Gonzalez Ortega] is a danger to the community or a flight risk" and that "the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay." Id. On 6/1/2026, Gonzalez Ortega filed a letterwhich this Court construed as a motion to enforce, see Docket Item 12arguing that the bond hearing he received was "not in compliance" with this Court's 5/12/2026 order. Docket Item 11 . In response, "the government concede[d] that based upon past decisions of this Court, this Court will most likely find that the bond hearing did not comport with the requirements of this Court's Order" because the immigration judge failed to consider alternatives to detention. See Docket Item 16 at 1 (explaining that immigration judge "noted that DHS did not present evidence regarding alternatives to detention, and thus offered no consideration of any alternatives"). Because the Court's 5/12/2026 order required the immigration judge to consider non-bond alternatives to detention and she did not do so, the Court GRANTS Gonzalez Ortega's motion to enforce, Docket Item 1 . Within 7 days of the date of this order, the government shall hold a new hearing for Gonzalez Ortega that complies with this Court's order, see Docket Item 7 . At that hearing, the immigration judge must consider whether non-bond alternatives to detention, such as electronic monitoring, could effectively mitigate any risk of flight or danger. On or before 6/12/2026, 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. The government also requested that it not be required to produce a transcript of the bond hearing "given [its] concessions." Docket Item 16 at 2. That request is granted, however, if the government does not provide a transcript, it shall send a copy of the recording of the bond hearing on a CD or USB drive to the Clerk's office for manual filing on or before 6/12/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/4/2026. (RFI)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim. Modified on 6/4/2026 to add status report date (RFI). Modified on 6/5/2026 to add clarification (RFI). (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#19

Jun 12, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball re bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

#20

Jun 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 19 Letter filed by Michael Ball.The respondents have filed a letter, Docket Item 19, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 18, but found that the government met its burden on 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 6/15/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 06/15/2026)

Jun 15, 2026

NOTICE of MANUAL FILING by Michael Ball re 18 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,,. (DDS)

#21

Jun 29, 2026

RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE, re 20 Text Order regarding the bond hearing, filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (DDS) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

#22

Jun 30, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 21 Motion to Enforce filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. Response due 7/7/2026. Reply due 7/21/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 6/30/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega and Kelly W. Sackheim. (Entered: 06/30/2026)

#23

Jul 02, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball with transcript of bond hearing. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/02/2026)

#24

Jul 02, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 23 Letter (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/02/2026)

#25

Jul 07, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball in opposition to motion to enforce. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 07/07/2026)

#26

Jul 07, 2026

CONSENT for Electronic Service (E-Service) by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (DDS) (Entered: 07/07/2026)

Jul 07, 2026

Remark: 26 CONSENT for Electronic Service (e-Service) form is not in compliance with the instructions. The partys email was not added. Clerk mailed a copy of the WDNY form "Registration and Consent for Electronic Service (E-Service)" to Plaintiff at the address of record. (DDS)

#27

Jul 24, 2026

REPLY to TEXT ORDER re 21 Motion to Enforce filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (DDS) (Entered: 07/27/2026)

#28

Jul 29, 2026

MOTION for Leave to Participate in Electronic Filing filed by Translator Kelly W. Sackheim. (LB) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#29

Aug 06, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 28 motion for leave to obtain electronic access to docket. On July 29, 2026, non-party Kelly Sackheim, a translator who was contacted by the petitioner (and multiple other detainees at the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility) for assistance with a pending habeas petition, moved for this Court's permission to allow her access to CM/ECF in this case so that she can receive more timely copies of filings to assist with translation. The request is granted. The Clerk is directed to add Ms. Sackheim as a "noticing party" in the case, which will permit her to receive a Notice of Electronic Filing for any filing but will not affect the petitioner's status as a pro se litigant. The petitioner will continue to receive paper copies of all filings by mail. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/6/2026. (RFI)This was mailed to: the petitioner and Kelly Sackheim.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#30

Aug 24, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 21 Motion to Enforce filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. On 5/12/2026, this Court granted in part Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Docket Item 1, and ordered "the respondents to provide [him] with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge," Docket Item 7. At that hearing, "the government [would] bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk," and "the immigration judge [was to] consider non-bond alternatives to detention." Id. On 5/19/2026, an immigration judge held a bond hearing and found that the government met its burden on risk of flight. Docket Item 8. On 6/1/2026, Gonzalez Ortega submitted a letter to this Court arguing that his bond hearing was "not in compliance" with this Court's order of 5/12/2026, Docket Item 11 at 1 (capitalization altered), which the Court construed as a motion to enforce, Docket Item 12. The government then conceded that the immigration judge did not consider alternatives to detention. See Docket Item 16 at 1 ("[T]he immigration judge specifically noted that [the government] did not present evidence regarding alternatives to detention[] and thus offered no consideration of any alternatives."). Accordingly, this Court ordered the respondents to provide Gonzalez Ortega with a new bond hearing that complied with its prior order. Docket Item 18. Gonzalez Ortega received his second bond hearing on 6/11/2026, at which the immigration judge "ordered [that he] remain detained upon a finding of risk of flight even in consideration of alternatives to detention." Docket Item 19. Gonzalez Ortega now moves this Court to enforce its 6/4/2026 order. Docket Item 21. More specifically, he makes one argument: that his second bond hearing did not comply with the Court's order because the immigration judge's conclusion was "not supported by the evidence and fail[ed] to meet the government's burden of proof." Id. at 1 (capitalization altered). After carefully reviewing Gonzalez Ortega's submission, the government's response, Gonzalez Ortega's reply, and the transcript from Gonzalez Ortega's bond hearing, the Court finds that Gonzalez Ortega's bond hearing complied with the Court's 6/4/2026 order.The Court's role in reviewing a motion to enforce "is narrow: it is to determine whether [the r]espondent[s] complied with the [Court's o]rder, not to review the hearing evidence de novo and determine whether [the p]etitioner" should be released. See Apollinaire v. Barr, 2019 WL 4023560, at *3 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2019) (italics omitted); see also Sol v. I.N.S., 274 F.3d 648, 651 (2d Cir. 2001) (holding that "federal jurisdiction over [section] 2241 petitions does not extend to review of discretionary determinations by the [immigration judge]"). At Gonzalez Ortega's second bond hearing, the immigration judge considered the following evidence when finding that Gonzalez Ortega is a flight risk: his unlawful entry; his lack of "family ties who could confer immigration benefits" to him; the government's lack of information about his "employment history in the United States, including any length and stability"; the denial of his asylum application; and his failure to "appear before another immigration judge on January 5, 2024." Docket Item 23 at 8-9. This Court might have concluded differently than did the immigration judge based on that evidence, but it cannot say that the immigration judge failed to comply with this Court's order when she carefully considered the evidence before her and found that Gonzalez Ortega is a flight risk.Therefore, the Court finds that Gonzalez Ortega's bond hearing was consistent with this Court's order. Gonzalez Ortega's motion to enforce therefore is DENIED. If Gonzalez Ortega does not show cause why issues remain before this Court on or before 9/7/2026, the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/24/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: the petitioner.Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 08/24/2026)

#31

Sep 04, 2026

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE re 30 by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. (TME) (Entered: 09/04/2026)

#32

Sep 08, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In Last Name Unknown v. Ball, 2026 WL 2096666, at *4 (W.D.N.Y. July 21, 2026), this Court held that a petitioner whose detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) was entitled to immediate release when a warrant had not been obtained for his arrest. The petitioner argues that he was arrested without a warrant and therefore is entitled to immediate release. Docket Item 1 at 2; Docket Item 31 at 1. The respondents shall respond to that argument on or before 9/15/2026, and provide a copy of any warrant or Notice to Appear that the respondents say was issued. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/8/2026. (DDC)This was mailed to: the petitioner. (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#33

Sep 14, 2026

Letter from Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega, dated 8/9/2026, to Judge Vilardo. (DDS) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#34

Sep 15, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 32 Text Order,, filed by Michael Ball. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#35

Sep 15, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 34 Reply/Response (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#36

Sep 28, 2026

Letter from Kelly Sackheim, dated 9/22/2026, to Judge Vilardo. (DDS) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#37

Sep 28, 2026

Remark: Petitioner facts contradicting warrant. (DDS) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#38

Sep 28, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball objecting to Ms. Sackheim's filing at ECF No. 36. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#39

Sep 28, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 37 Remark filed by Segundo Alcivar Gonzalez Ortega. The respondents shall respond to the petitioner's letter by 10/5/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/28/2026. (DDC) This was mailed to: the petitioner. (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#40

Sep 28, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 38 Letter (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#41

Sep 29, 2026

Letter filed by Michael Ball re Petitioner's challenge to I-213. (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/29/2026)

#42

Sep 29, 2026

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Michael Ball re 41 Letter (Khalil, Adam) (Entered: 09/29/2026)