District of New Jersey • 1:25-cv-17601

#1

Nov 15, 2025

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-16826380.), filed by RONALD ERNESTO VASQUEZ-COLOCHO. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit A, BIA Stay of Removal Order, # 3 Exhibit B, Petition for Review, # 4 Exhibit C, Third Circuit Stay, # 5 Exhibit D, Decision to Continue Detention)(HAJDARPASIC, ENES) (Entered: 11/15/2025)

Nov 17, 2025

Case assigned to Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb. (tjg, )

Nov 17, 2025

Notice of Judicial Preferences

Nov 17, 2025

Case Assigned/Reassigned

Nov 17, 2025

Notice of Judicial Preferences. Click here for the Judge's Individual Procedure Requirements. (dmw)

#2

Dec 02, 2025

Temporary Restraining Order

#3

Dec 03, 2025

Order to Answer

#4

Dec 09, 2025

Substitution of Attorney

#5

Dec 10, 2025

Response to Habeas Petition

#6

Dec 15, 2025

Brief

#7

Feb 02, 2026

Letter

#8

Feb 03, 2026

TEXT ORDER. This matter comes before the Court upon Respondents' status report, establishing that Petitioner is subject to a final order of removal which is no longer stayed. Dkt. No. 7. Respondents' request to transfer Petitioner outside New Jersey for purposes of imminent removal, Dkt. No. 7, is GRANTED. Petitioner shall, within 10 days of the date of this Order, file a supplemental brief addressing the effect of the Third Circuit determination on Petitioner's claim of prolonged final removal order detention. Respondents shall file a response to Petitioner's supplemental brief within 10 days. The 2 Motion for TRO is dismissed as moot. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 02/03/2026.(Costigan, Roberta) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

Feb 03, 2026

Order on Motion for TRO

#9

Feb 12, 2026

Brief

#10

Feb 22, 2026

Letter

#11

Feb 23, 2026

TEXT ORDER On November 15, 2025, Petitioner filed a Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his mandatory detention by immigration authorities in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and his Fifth Amendment right to due process. Petition, Dkt. No. 1. Respondents filed an answer in opposition to the Petition and submitted that Petitioner was subject to final removal order detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1). Answer, Dkt. No. 5. Petitioner replied that his detention reverted to discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) because the Third Circuit stayed his removal order. Reply, Dkt. No. 6. On February 2, 2026, Respondents provided a status report, reporting that the Third Circuit denied Petitioner's motion for stay of removal. Status Report, Dkt. No. 7.> > On February 3, 2026, this Court granted Respondents' request to transfer Petitioner outside New Jersey for purposes of imminent removal pursuant to the Third Circuit's lift of the temporary stay on Petitioner's final order of removal. Text Order, Dkt. No. 8. The Court further ordered Petitioner to file a supplemental brief addressing the effect of the Third Circuit's determination on Petitioner's claim of prolonged final removal order detention. Id. Petitioner submitted a brief arguing that his prolonged detention of more than 6 months without a likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future violates due process pursuant to Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). Petr's Suppl Br., Dkt. No. 9. Respondents countered that after the presumptively reasonable 6-month period of final removal order detention, the burden is on the noncitizen to provide good reason to believe there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, at which point the Government must submit evidence sufficient to rebut that showing. Respt's Suppl. Br. at 2, Dkt. No. 10. Respondents argue Petitioner has not met his burden simply by relying on the passage of time, where more than half the period that Petitioner was detained Respondents were not authorized to effectuate removal and restrictions on Petitioner's removal were lifted only 19 days ago. Id. at 2-3. Under the circumstances presented here, the Court agrees that Petitioner's final removal order detention does not violate due process under Zadvydas at this time. Therefore, the Petition is DENIED without prejudice. Respondents shall provide bi-weekly reports on the status of, and efforts made toward, Petitioner's removal. So Ordered by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 02/23/2026. (Costigan, Roberta) (Entered: 02/23/2026)

Feb 23, 2026

Order

#12

Mar 07, 2026

Letter

Mar 16, 2026

Order

Mar 16, 2026

Terminate Civil Case