District of New Mexico • 2:26-cv-01843

#1

Jun 08, 2026

PETITION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. 2241, filed by Attila Gartai. (vlv) (Entered: 06/08/2026)

#2

Jun 08, 2026

NOTICE: In accordance with the Standing Order, filed January 28, 2026 in 26-MC-00004-03 (Doc. 3), the Clerk of Court provides notice of completion of electronic service. A copy of the petition in this matter was provided to all federal respondents by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system. The parties should review the Standing Order, and any further Orders entered in this matter regarding the deadline to respond to the petition. (vlv)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (Entered: 06/08/2026)

Jun 08, 2026

United States District Judge Margaret I. Strickland and United States Magistrate Judge Damian L. Martinez assigned. (vlv)

#3

Jun 09, 2026

ORDER DIRECTING AMENDMENT by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland. (gri) (Entered: 06/09/2026)

#4

Jun 15, 2026

MOTION and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed under 28 U.S.C. 1915 by Attila Gartai. (jjs) (Entered: 06/15/2026)

#5

Jun 22, 2026

AMENDED PETITION for a Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. 2241 against FNU LNU., filed by Attila Gartai. (jn) (Entered: 06/23/2026)

#6

Jun 24, 2026

EMERGENCY MOTION to Prevent Transfer by Attila Gartai. (jn) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

#7

Jun 26, 2026

ORDER TO ANSWER/SHOW CAUSE AND ENJOINING TRANSFER by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland: The USAO shall ANSWER the Petition and any pending motions for release within 10 business days and show cause why relief should not be granted, unless the Court sets a separate deadline/hearing to address emergency relief. The USAO's answer MUST specify whether the Court has already ruled on the legal issue(s) in this case and, if so, whether the facts are distinguishable from prior rulings. In addition, the USAO's answer must address how 8 C.F.R. § 1235.4 and the Immigration Court's decision granting withdrawal of Petitioner's application for admission impact Petitioner's claims. Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 4, is GRANTED and Petitioner is excused from prepaying the filing fee. Petitioner's Motion to Prohibit Transfer, ECF No. 6, is GRANTED and the Government is prohibited from transferring or removing Petitioner from the District of New Mexico while these proceedings are pending, absent a final order of removal. Finally, the Clerk's Office shall confirm the docket lists the following Respondents: the facility Warden; the El Paso Field Office Director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement; the U.S. Attorney General; the Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (gri)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (Entered: 06/26/2026)

Jun 26, 2026

Order on Motion for Order AND Order on Motion to Proceed 28 U.S.C. 1915

#8

Jun 29, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by James Andrew Dickens on behalf of Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, El Paso Field Office Director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Markwayne Mullin, U.S. Attorney General (Dickens, James) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

#9

Jul 09, 2026

Federal Respondents' RESPONSE re 7 Order on Motion to Proceed 28 U.S.C. 1915,,,,,,, Order on Motion for Order,,,,,, 5 Amended Complaint filed by Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, El Paso Field Office Director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Markwayne Mullin, U.S. Attorney General. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A--IJ Order, # 2 Exhibit B--BIA Order) (Dickens, James) (Entered: 07/09/2026)

#10

Jul 16, 2026

ORDER TO SUPPLEMENT by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland. Within SEVEN DAYS of the date of this Order, Respondents shall file, under seal: (1) Petitioner's immigration record, including any orders of removal; and (2) evidence supporting Respondents' assertion that "Respondents attempted to remove the Petitioner from the United States by commercial flight on June 25, 2026, but the Petitioner refused to board the flight[,]" Resp. at 4, ECF No. 9. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (gri) (Entered: 07/16/2026)

Jul 16, 2026

Order

#12

Jul 20, 2026

SECOND ORDER TO SUPPLEMENT by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland. On June 22, 2026, Petitioner filed an Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Under 28 U.S.C. sec. 2241 arguing that his prolonged detention is unconstitutional. ECF No. 5 at 6-7. It appears that he has been in immigration detention since August 2025. See Resp. at 3, ECF No. 9 .Habeas corpus review is available if a noncitizen is "in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States[.]" 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(3); see also Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 687 (2001). Where, as here, the petitioner is subject to a final order of removal, detention is governed by Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682, and 8 U.S.C. § 1231. The Government is expected to secure a noncitizen's removal within 90 days after issuing the removal order. Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 682; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(1). "[D]uring the 90-day removal period,... [the noncitizen] must be held in custody." Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 683 (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2)). After that, the Government may continue detaining the noncitizen only for as long as is "reasonably necessary" to secure their removal. Id. at 683, 689; see 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6). The Supreme Court determined that a six-month detention period is presumptively reasonable. Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701. "After this 6-month period, once the [petitioner] provides good reason to believe that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future, the Government must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut that showing." Id. Petitioner has been detained for more than six months. See Resp. at 3. According to the Response, "Respondents attempted to remove the Petitioner from the United States by commercial flight on June 25, 2026, but the Petitioner refused to board the flight." Resp. at 4. And according to Respondents' First Supplement to Respondents' Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, "Respondents have secured another flight for the Petitioner and plan to remove him from the United States...." ECF No. 11 at 1. However, they have provided no evidence supporting either of these statements.First, this Court "has found no authority holding that a habeas petitioner can meet his burden under Zadvydas by showing an impediment of his own making precludes removal to his country of citizenship." Yu v. Castro, Case No. 2:26-cv-01100-MIS-LF, 2026 WL 1121989, at *2 (D.N.M. Apr. 24, 2026). In fact, the Tenth Circuit has stated that "[t]he risk of indefinite detention that motivated the Supreme Court's statutory interpretation in Zadvydas does not exist when an alien is the cause of his own detention." Singh v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 945 F.3d 1310, 1314 (10th Cir. 2019) (quoting Pelich v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 329 F.3d 1057, 1060 (9th Cir. 2003)). Thus, Respondents shall have until and including July 31, 2026 to present evidence, via affidavit or otherwise, supporting their assertion that "Respondents attempted to remove the Petitioner from the United States by commercial flight on June 25, 2026, but the Petitioner refused to board the flight." Resp. at 4.Second, to satisfy their burden under Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 701, Respondents "must respond with evidence sufficient to rebut th[e] showing" that there is no significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. Thus, Respondents shall have until and including July 31, 2026, to present evidence, via affidavit or otherwise, that there is a significant likelihood that Petitioner will be removed in the reasonably foreseeable future--e.g., an affidavit from an immigration official confirming that Respondents have secured another flight for the Petitioner and plan to remove him from the United States, when that flight is scheduled to depart, where the flight is scheduled to land, etc. Respondents may file this evidence under seal. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (gri) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

Jul 20, 2026

Order

#13

Jul 31, 2026

APPENDIX/SUPPLEMENT re 11 Appendix/Supplement, 12 Order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 9 Response, Second Supplement to Response by Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, El Paso Field Office Director for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Markwayne Mullin, U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit D--ICE Form 71-061) (Dickens, James) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

#14

Jul 31, 2026

ORDER by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland DISMISSING AS MOOT 1 Petition for 2241 Relief filed by Attila Gartai. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (ctc) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

#15

Jul 31, 2026

JUDGMENT by District Judge Margaret I. Strickland. (ctc) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

Jul 31, 2026

Order

#16

Aug 07, 2026

Mail Returned as Undeliverable re 10 Order,,. Mail sent to Attila Gartai (jn) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#17

Aug 07, 2026

Mail Returned as Undeliverable re 15 Judgment, 14 Order. Mail sent to Attila Gartai (jn) (Entered: 08/07/2026)