District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-12541

#1

Jun 04, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), filed by Jony Bayardo Alonso Zuniga.(LBO) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#2

Jun 04, 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 M. Page Kelley. (FGD) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#3

Jun 04, 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: 06/04/2026)

#4

Jun 04, 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 Monday, June 8, 2026.Respondents shall provide any further answer to the Petition, if necessary, no later than 1:00p.m. on Thursday, June 11, 2026.(MBM) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

#5

Jun 04, 2026

Copy re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), 4 Service Order - 2241 Petition mailed to Antone Moniz on 6/4/2026. (MBM) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

Jun 04, 2026

Copy Mailed

Jun 04, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#6

Jun 08, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#7

Jun 08, 2026

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

#8

Jun 08, 2026

Filing fee/payment: $ 5.00, receipt number 100015638 for 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) (NVB) (Entered: 06/08/2026)

#9

Jun 08, 2026

Judge Brian E. Murphy: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. “Respondents submit that the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently addressed by this Court in Martinez v. Hyde, No. 25-cv-11613-BEM, __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2025 WL 2084238 (D. Mass. July 24, 2025), and Romero v. Hyde, No. 25-cv-11631-BEM, __ F. Supp. 3d __, 2025 WL 2403827 (D. Mass. August 19, 2025).” Dkt. 7 at 1. In addition, Respondents assert that “Petitioner appears to be a member of the class certified in Guerrero Orellana v. Moniz, Civil Action No. 25-cv-12664-PBS, 2025 WL 3687757, at *10 (D. Mass. Dec. 19, 2025).” Id. at 1 n.1. Accordingly, Petitioner is “subject to detention under 8 U.S.C. [s.] 1226(a).” Guerrero Orellana, 2025 WL 3687757, at *10; see also Dkt. 7 -1 at 5 (Warrant for Arrest of Alien pursuant to section 1226). For the reasons stated in the cases cited by Respondents, this Petition is GRANTED in part. Respondents shall release Petitioner by 5:00 pm on Monday, June 15, 2026, unless, before that time, Petitioner is provided a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. s. 1226(a). 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: 06/08/2026)

#10

Jun 08, 2026

Copy re 9 Order mailed to Jony Bayardo Alonso Zuniga on 6/8/2026. (MBM) (Entered: 06/08/2026)

Jun 08, 2026

Copy Mailed

Jun 08, 2026

Order

Jun 08, 2026

Filing Fee/Payment Received

#11

Jun 25, 2026

Status Report

#12

Jun 26, 2026

Judgment

#13

Jun 26, 2026

Copy re 12 Judgment mailed to Jony Bayardo Alonso Zuniga A216663186 Plymouth County Correctional Facility 26 Long Pond Road Plymouth, MA 02360 on 6/26/2026. (CAM) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#14

Jun 26, 2026

Injunctive Relief

Jun 26, 2026

Copy Mailed

#15

Jun 29, 2026

Judge Brian E. Murphy: ELECTRONIC ORDER. Respondent is directed to respond to petitioner’s 14 filing on or before Thursday, July 2, 2026 and to include therewith all evidence presented to the immigration judge and a transcript or recording of the bond hearing.The Court also notes that Petitioner’s filing also includes a request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. Dkt. 14 at 7. However, the filing fails to meet the requirements for preliminary injunctive relief or a temporary restraining order pursuant to the Court's Local Rules or Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65, which require, inter alia, (1) the submission of a memorandum of reasons to support any motion, see Local Rule 7.1(b)(1); and (2) either notice to the adverse party or certification to support an ex parte order, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1); see also DuBois v. Alves, 2022 WL 4376041, at *5 (D. Mass. Aug. 22, 2022) (denying motion in part due to the failure to comply with Local Rules or Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65); Scott v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 2025 WL 1314248, at *1 (D. Mass. Apr. 1, 2025) (“If a litigant seeks injunctive relief prior to the final resolution of the case, they must also file a separate motion for a preliminary injunction identifying the relief sought and an accompanying memorandum providing factual and legal support for the motion.”). As such, Petitioner’s request for an emergency temporary restraining order is DENIED without prejudice. (MBM) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

Jun 29, 2026

Order

#16

Jul 02, 2026

Opposition to Motion

Jul 02, 2026

Order