District of Massachusetts • 1:25-cv-13494

#1

Nov 20, 2025

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11372390 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Rondinelle Valamiel Ramiro. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Araujo, Annelise) (Entered: 11/20/2025)

#2

Nov 21, 2025

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin 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 Paul G. Levenson. (CM) (Entered: 11/21/2025)

#3

Nov 21, 2025

General Order 19-02

#4

Nov 21, 2025

Service Order-2241 Petition

#5

Nov 21, 2025

Copy re 4 Service Order - 2241 Petition, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), emailed to Duty AUSA and mailed to Respondents and USAO on 11/21/2025. (SED) (Entered: 11/21/2025)

#6

Nov 21, 2025

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The petitioner has filed request for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Doc. No. 1. The Court has now conducted an initial review of the petition and notes the following. The petitioner, a citizen of Brazil, does not appear to be in immigration detention. See id. ¶¶ 8, 12 (suggesting “pattern of recent behavior of ICE” means “arrest and detention are imminent” and seeking “restraining order preventing ICE from detaining” him); id. at 22 (seeking order preventing detention and prohibiting credible fear interview but not seeking release from custody); but see id. ¶¶ 19, 72 (asserting in paragraphs possibly copied from different persons’ petitions that petitioner “has been detained at the Plymouth County Correctional Facility” since March 2025 and his “detention.. violates” his due process rights). Much of the petition sets forth challenges to the invocation and administration of the expedited removal process, not to the petitioner’s (anticipated) detention. Where challenges to immigration detention and the removal process are concerned, this Court’s jurisdiction is limited by both the traditional scope of habeas review (which is a remedy centered on securing release from unlawful executive detention) and the Immigration and Nationality Act (which forecloses this Court’s review of most aspects of the expedited removal process).In light of the foregoing, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows. The petitioner shall, by close of business Tuesday, November 25, 2025, SHOW CAUSE why this Court has jurisdiction over the claims he has alleged and jurisdiction to grant the relief he seeks. The petitioner’s memorandum also should state whether he is presently in detention and, if not, why the Court should find he is “in custody” for purposes of habeas review. The respondents’ obligation to answer the petition is STAYED pending the Court’s review of the petitioner’s show-cause response.The Court further ORDERS that, to preserve the status quo so that it can ascertain whether or to what extent it has jurisdiction over this action, the respondents shall not remove the petitioner from the United States pending further order of this Court. If the petitioner is taken into custody by immigration authorities: (1) the respondents shall notify the petitioner’s counsel of this fact and identify the petitioner’s location so that counsel’s ability to confer with her client is preserved; and (2) neither the respondents nor their agents shall remove the petitioner from the District of Massachusetts, if he is taken into custody within this District, without 72 hours’ prior notice to the Court.(SED) (Entered: 11/21/2025)

Nov 21, 2025

Copy Mailed

Nov 21, 2025

Notice of Case Assignment

Nov 21, 2025

Order