Western District of Pennsylvania • 3:26-cv-01094

#1

Jun 11, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee, including Administrative fee, $5, receipt number APAWDC-9646195), filed by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, B, C, D, E, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/11/2026)

#2

Jun 11, 2026

MOTION for attorney Christopher M. Casazza to Appear Pro Hac Vice, (Filing fee $70, Receipt # APAWDC-9646359) by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit A) (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/11/2026)

#3

Jun 11, 2026

MOTION for Preliminary Injunction by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/11/2026)

#4

Jun 11, 2026

BRIEF in Support re 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/11/2026)

Jun 11, 2026

Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan added. (kss)

#5

Jun 12, 2026

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Petitioner's counsel shall serve Respondents with a copy of this Order and the Petition via e-mail, as specified, and file a notice of compliance. Respondents' counsel shall file a notice of appearance within 3 days of the filing of Petitioner's Certificate of Compliance of Service. Respondents shall file any responses or answers to the petition within 7 days of the date of service. Petitioner's reply is due within 5 days of Respondents' response. Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 6/12/2026. (pak) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

#6

Jun 12, 2026

STANDING ZADVYDAS ORDER. In alien habeas cases, petitioners often challenge their detention as being unconstitutionally prolonged, either at the outset or later during the pendency of their cases. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) ("The serious constitutional problem arising out of a statute that, in these circumstances, permits an indefinite, perhaps permanent, deprivation of human liberty without any such protection is obvious.") In order to monitor and assess the validity of any such potential claim, Respondents shall file a status report updating the Court on Petitioner's detention status six months from today. No such report need be filed if Petitioner has been released prior to that date. Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 6/12/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (pak) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

#7

Jun 12, 2026

CERTIFICATE of Compliance re 5 Order,, by Christopher M Casazza on behalf of HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

#9

Jun 12, 2026

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

#10

Jun 12, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Gregory C. Melucci on behalf of LEONARD ODDO, JOHN RIFE. (Melucci, Gregory) (Entered: 06/12/2026)

Jun 12, 2026

Order

#11

Jun 22, 2026

MISC Order Commanding Not to Notify of Existence of Subpoena

#12

Jun 22, 2026

Errata re 11 Motion for Order Commanding Not to Notify of Existence of Subpoena by LEONARD ODDO, JOHN RIFE. Reason for Correction: WRONG EVENT CHOSEN AT TIME OF FILING. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (Melucci, Gregory) Document removed from public view and refiled at 13 . Modified text on 6/22/2026. (kss) (Entered: 06/22/2026)

#13

Jun 22, 2026

RESPONSE to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, filed by LEONARD ODDO, JOHN RIFE. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (kss) (Entered: 06/22/2026)

Jun 22, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE OF CORRECTION re 11 APPLICATION for Order Commanding Not to Notify Any Person of the Existence of Subpoena, 12 Errata. ERROR: Wrong event selected. CORRECTION FOR FUTURE FILINGS: Clerk has redocketed the entry with the correct event. THIS MESSAGE IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NO FURTHER ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE FILING AT ISSUE. (kss)

#14

Jun 23, 2026

REPLY to 13 Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Casazza, Christopher) (Entered: 06/23/2026)

Jun 23, 2026

W/ 14 REPLY in Support of 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by HENRY ADONIAS SOSA-SOSA. (kss)

#15

Jun 26, 2026

ORDER denying 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Petitioner, a native of Guatemala, is currently detained at Moshannon Valley Correctional Center, and seeks to enjoin Respondent(s) from transferring him to another detention facility. Congress has vested the Secretary of Homeland Security and his/her delegates, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with the authority to detain aliens pending a decision on their removal proceedings. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1231(a)(2), 1226(a), (c)(1). And Congress has vested the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) with the discretion to set the place of detention. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1); Sinclair v. Att'y Gen., 198 F. App'x 218, 222 n.3 (3d Cir. 2006) (collecting cases). Within DHS' discretion is the authority to transfer aliens from one detention center to another. Calla-Collado v. Att'y Gen., 663 F.3d 680, 685 (3d Cir. 2011). Reading § 1231(g)(1) together with Congress's limitations in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) on federal district courts' jurisdiction to review discretionary actions by DHS, federal district courts have concluded that they lack jurisdiction to review DHS' decisions under § 1231. See, e.g., Jane v. Rodriguez, No. 20-5922, 2020 WL 10140953, *1-2 (D.N.J. May 22, 2020) (citing cases). Nor does the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, provide the Court with jurisdiction to enjoin transfer. Barrios v. Att'y Gen., 452 F. App'x 196, 198 (3d Cir. 2011) (jurisdiction-stripping provision in section § 1252(g) of INA, which is identical to jurisdiction-stripping language of §1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), is not superseded by All Writs Act). Consistent with this authority, this Court concludes that it lacks jurisdiction to enjoin Petitioner's transfer. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's 3 Motion is DENIED. Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 6/26/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (pak) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#16

Jun 26, 2026

ORDER. For the reasons stated in Villagrez v. Bondi, et al., No. 26-72, 2026 WL 545380 (W.D. Pa. Feb. 26, 2026) (Ranjan, J.), the Court GRANTS the 1 habeas petition. Additionally, to the extent that the government argues that the presence of 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5)(A) subjects Petitioner to mandatory detention, the Court disagrees. See Qasemi v. Francis, No. 25-CV-10029 (LJL), 2025 WL 3654098, at *1011, 13 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2025) (finding that Section 1182(d)(5)(A)'s language of "returned to the custody from which he was paroled" refers to DHS's control over Petitioner, not the prior detention status to which Petitioner was subjected to at an earlier time). The Court ISSUES the writ, on these terms. (1) Respondents shall cause Petitioner to be taken to a neutral immigration judge of the Executive Office of Immigration Review for an individualized bond hearing to occur within 30 days of this order, or else release Petitioner by such date. (2) Respondents shall ensure that such a hearing include the required due process, i.e., at a minimum, factfinding based on a record produced before the decisionmaker and disclosed to Petitioner; an opportunity to make arguments on the Petitioner's behalf; and the right to an individualized determination of Petitioner's interests. See Ghanem v. Warden Essex Cnty. Corr. Facility, No. 21-1908, 2022 WL 574624, at *2 (3d Cir. Feb. 25, 2022). (3) Petitioner shall be responsible for securing the necessary transcripts and record of the bond hearing. The Court further finds that Respondents' position was substantially justified in this case, so no fees shall be awarded. The Court trusts the immigration judge to comply with this order and ensure that Petitioner is provided due process, and therefore the immigration judge shall explain his or her individualized determination on the record. See Kamara v. Atty Gen. of U.S., 420 F.3d 202, 212 (3d Cir. 2005). The Clerk of Court shall administratively CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 6/26/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (pak) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#17

Jun 26, 2026

FINAL JUDGMENT, entered consistent with the above order (ECF 16). Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 6/26/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (pak) (Entered: 06/26/2026)

Jun 26, 2026

Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Jun 26, 2026

Judgment (Rule 58)

Jun 26, 2026

Order