Western District of Texas • 5:26-cv-03266

#1

May 18, 2026

EMERGENCY Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 PAID receipt number Not Available), filed by Josmer Jose Carvajal Yulden.(r013) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

May 18, 2026

MOTION for Immediate Stay of Removal, EMERGENCY MOTION to Prohibit Transfer and MOTION for Order to Show Cause (contained in petition) by Josmer Jose Carvajal Yulden. (kc)

May 18, 2026

If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Kelly G. Stephenson (kc)

May 18, 2026

Case has been randomly assigned to the docket of Honorable Judge Xavier Rodriguez. (kc)

#2

May 20, 2026

Case Opening Letter mailed to Josmer Jose Carvajal Yulden. (kc) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

#3

May 20, 2026

TEXT ORDER FOR SERVICE of 1 for Writ of Habeas Corpus signed by Judge Xavier Rodriguez. It is ORDERED that notice of electronic filing of 1 Petition and this Order to the United States Attorney in San Antonio, Texas shall constitute service on the Federal Respondents and on all Respondents unless otherwise contested. It is FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall file a response to the Petition within seven (7) days of the date of service. The response must identify: (1) Petitioner's alleged country of birth, so that Petitioner can be located in the Online Detainee Locator System; (2) Petitioner's alleged date of entry and statutory basis for removability; (3) any previous immigration detention history, e.g., whether Petitioner has previously been subject to immigration detention and, if so, the approximate date of Petitioner's previous release into the interior; and (4) Petitioner's alleged immigration status, e.g., whether Petitioner has a pending claim for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture or is subject to a final removal order. Additionally, because this case appears to turn on whether Petitioners detention without a bond hearing violates the due process rights afforded to noncitizens who have established a substantial presence in the United States, Respondents must consider the Courts prior orders addressing this question and note any material factual differences between those cases and this one. E.g., Valencia Reyes v. Noem, No. SA-25-CV-1921-XR, 2026 WL 981034 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 25, 2026); Gonzalez Carrillo v. Bondi, No. SA-26-CV-778-XR, 2026 WL 981037 (W.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2026). If Respondents so choose, in lieu of a full response, they may instead file a response indicating that there are no material factual differences here and preserving all legal arguments made by the Federal Respondents in those cases. It is FURTHER ORDERED that, if Petitioner elects to file a reply, Petitioner may do so no later than seven days after the Respondents file their answers/responses. (cb) (Entered: 05/20/2026)

May 20, 2026

Show Cause AND Stay AND Transfer Case

May 20, 2026

Order

May 20, 2026

Order on Motion to Show Cause AND Order on Motion to Stay AND Order on Motion to Transfer Case

May 20, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

May 20, 2026

To be Referred to SA Mag Judge

May 20, 2026

Text Order DENYING [] Motion to Stay; DENYING [] Motion to Transfer Case; GRANTING [] Motion for Order to Show Cause entered by Judge Xavier Rodriguez. The Court lacks jurisdiction to stay Petitioner's removal. "A request for a stay of removal is a challenge to a removal order." See Imran v. Harper, No. 25-30370, 2026 WL 93131, at *1 (5th Cir. Jan. 13, 2026). District courts generally "lack[] jurisdiction to grant such relief." Id. Federal courts lack jurisdiction over "claims connected directly and immediately with a 'decision or action by the Attorney General to commence proceedings, adjudicate cases, or execute removal orders.'" Humphries v. Various Fed. USINS Emps., 164 F.3d 936, 943 (5th Cir. 1999) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g)). Plaintiff's motion for an order to show cause is MOOT in light of the Court's service order 3 . Finally, the Court need enjoin any transfer of Petitioner to a different detention facility because such a transfer would not deprive the Court of jurisdiction over the Petition. See Griffin v. Ebbert, 751 F.3d 288, 290 (5th Cir. 2014) (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (cb)