District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-12189

#1

May 14, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11744137 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Carlos Monterroso Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B) (Smulow, Daniel). (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#2

May 14, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Brian E. Murphy 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. (NMC) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#3

May 14, 2026

NOTICE ELECTRONIC NOTICE TO COUNSEL: Counsel shall complete and file in PDF format a Local Category Form. The form can be found on the court's website under Resources/Forms. Counsel will use the event under Other Documents- Civil Cover Sheet & Category Sheet. (NVB) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#4

May 14, 2026

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (MBM) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#5

May 14, 2026

Civil Cover Sheet & Category Sheet re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), by Carlos Monterroso Garcia. (Smulow, Daniel) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#6

May 14, 2026

Judge Brian E. Murphy: ORDER entered. ORDER CONCERNING SERVICE OF PETITION AND STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL. Respondents shall determine whether Petitioner is a member of the class certified in Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, No. 25-CV-12664-PBS (D. Mass.), and notify the Court no later than 1:00 p.m. on Friday, May 15, 2026.Respondents shall provide any further answer to the Petition, if necessary, no later than 1:00 p.m. on Monday, May 18, 2026.(MBM) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#7

May 14, 2026

Copy re 6 Service Order - 2241 Petition,, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) mailed to all respondents on 5/14/2026. (MBM) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

May 14, 2026

Copy Mailed

May 14, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

May 14, 2026

Notice - Other

#8

May 15, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Erica McMahon on behalf of Todd Lyons, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Wesling (McMahon, Erica) (Entered: 05/15/2026)

#9

May 15, 2026

RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER by Todd Lyons, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Wesling re 6 Service Order - 2241 Petition,, . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(McMahon, Erica) (Entered: 05/15/2026)

#10

May 15, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Vincent Engingro, III on behalf of Todd Lyons, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Wesling (Engingro, Vincent) (Entered: 05/15/2026)

#11

May 18, 2026

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

#12

May 19, 2026

Judge Brian E. Murphy: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered GRANTING the petition. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. s. 241.4(l)(2), “[a] district director may... revoke release of an alien when, in the district director’s opinion, revocation is in the public interest and circumstances do not reasonably permit referral of the case to the Executive Associate Commissioner.” Petitioner contends that—even assuming Respondent David Wesling (“Wesling”), who signed the Notice of Revocation of Release, Dkt. 11 -4 at 2, had authority to revoke release—“there is no evidence that... it was not reasonably practical to obtain the Executive Associate Director’s approval” as required by 8 C.F.R. s. 241.4(l)(2), Dkt. 1 ¶ 73. Respondents do not contest this point, see generally Dkt. 11, and so the Court finds for Petitioner. See Ryan v. Newark Grp., Inc., 814 F. Supp. 3d 44, 57 (D. Mass. 2025) (“As Plaintiffs have failed to contest [Defendant’s] test results or otherwise respond in any way to [Defendant’s] argument that its test results refute the core allegations of Plaintiffs’ case, the negative test results and accompanying argument are deemed conceded.”). When Respondents fail to properly revoke release pursuant to the relevant regulations, the remedy is release, see, e.g., Perez-Escobar v. Moniz, 792 F. Supp. 3d 224, 226–27 (D. Mass. 2025), and the Court need not consider the merits of Petitioner’s remaining claims. However, the Court will also note that the mere statement that “ICE is seeking a travel document to effect [Petitioner’s] expeditious removal to Mexico,” Dkt. 11 -4 at 1, and representations by Acting Assistant Field Office Director Brian Sullivan that ICE will, in the future, notify Mexico of the intended removal and effectuate it if Mexico accepts Petitioner, Dkt. 11 -1 ¶¶ 23 –24, are together insufficient evidence that Petitioner’s removal is reasonably foreseeable for the purposes of Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 699 (2001).Accordingly, the petition is GRANTED and Petitioner is ORDERED immediately released. Any request for fees should be filed within the deadlines set by the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. s. 2412.(MBM) (Entered: 05/19/2026)

#13

May 19, 2026

Judgment

May 19, 2026

Order