Western District of New York • 6:26-cv-06677

#1

Jun 30, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5884138.), filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca.(Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 06/30/2026)

#2

Jun 30, 2026

CONTINUATION OF EXHIBITS . (Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 06/30/2026)

#3

Jun 30, 2026

CONTINUATION OF EXHIBITS Correspondence with ICE. (Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 06/30/2026)

#4

Jul 01, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. So that the petitioner can fully participate in these proceedings and maintain adequate access to legal counsel, the respondents are enjoined from transferring the petitioner to any district outside the Western District of New York. See Perez y Perez v. Noem, 2025 WL 1908284, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. June 13, 2025) (collecting cases). In Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61 (2d Cir. 2026), the Second Circuit held that noncitizens who are present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled are not subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) but instead are subject to detention under section 1226. And in Cabrera Martinez v. Marich, 816 F. Supp. 3d 356 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), this Court held that detention of noncitizens who have remained in the country following expiration of parole is under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not section 1225. Additionally, this Court held in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), "that constitutional due process requires the government to bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the individual is either a danger to the community or a flight risk even at an initial bond hearing under section 1226(a)." Id. at 598. It appears that the holdings of da Cunha, Alvarez Ortiz, and/or Cabrera Martinez may apply to the petitioner in this case. Accordingly, the respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on or before 7/8/2026, why, in light of those decisions, (1) the petition in this case should not be granted, and (2) the Court should not order that the petitioner receive a bond hearing at which the government bears the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk and at which the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/1/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 07/01/2026)

Jul 01, 2026

Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge: A United States Magistrate of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form (AO-85) is available for download at http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/forms. (MMG)

Jul 01, 2026

Case assigned to Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Notification to chambers of online civil opening. (MMG)

#5

Jul 08, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance of Government Attorney: Chelsea A. Cruz, appearing on behalf of James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. (Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 07/08/2026)

#6

Jul 08, 2026

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney.(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 07/08/2026)

#7

Jul 08, 2026

MEMORANDUM in Support re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Deportation Officer, # 2 Exhibit A to Declaration)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 07/08/2026)

#8

Jul 10, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch. Response due by 7/17/2026. Reply due by 7/22/2026. If necessary, oral argument will be scheduled at a later date. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/10/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 07/10/2026)

#9

Jul 17, 2026

RESPONSE in Opposition re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. (Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 07/17/2026)

#10

Jul 21, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch. Virtual Oral Argument set for 7/30/2026 at 2:30 PM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Dial-in instructions will be emailed directly to the parties. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/21/2026. (CMD) (Entered: 07/21/2026)

#11

Jul 22, 2026

REPLY to Response to Motion re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney. (Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#12

Jul 30, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew K. Borowski on behalf of Julio Fermin Gualan Saca (Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 07/30/2026)

#13

Jul 30, 2026

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo: Oral Argument re 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch held on 7/30/2026. Court ordered that this proceeding is not to be recorded, or taped in any way. If someone does record it, they will be found in contempt of court. Court heard from parties and reserved decision. Appearances by Teams Video Conference. For petitioner: Mario J. Gutierrez and Matthew K. Borowski. For respondents: AUSA Chelsea A. Cruz. (Court Reporter Laurel Tubbs.) (CMD) (Entered: 07/30/2026)

#14

Aug 06, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca; denying 6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch. On June 30, 2026, the petitioner, Julio Fermin Gualan Saca, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 8 U.S.C. § 2241 alleging that his detention without a constitutionally adequate bond hearing is unlawful. Docket Item 1. The respondents have moved to dismiss, arguing that Gualan Saca failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to filing his petition. Docket Item 6. The Court heard oral argument and reserved decision. See Docket Item 13. For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS the petition and DENIES the motion to dismiss. "A habeas petitioner must normally exhaust administrative remedies before seeking federal court intervention." Hernandez-Hernandez v. Feeley, 535 F. Supp. 3d 142, 150 (W.D.N.Y. 2021) (quoting Michalski v. Decker, 279 F. Supp.3d 487, 495 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)). This requirement, however, is "prudential." Id. (quoting Hossain v. Barr, 2019 WL 5964678, at *3 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 2019)). Courts generally "will waive the prudential exhaustion requirement where '(1) available remedies provide no genuine opportunity for adequate relief; (2) irreparable injury may occur without immediate judicial relief; (3) administrative appeal would be futile; and (4) in certain instances a plaintiff has raised a substantial constitutional question.'" Id. (quoting Beharry v. Ashcroft, 329 F.3d 51, 62 (2d Cir. 2003)). Here, the Court finds that waiving the exhaustion requirement is appropriate for several reasons. First, Gualan Saca seeks a bond hearing with the burden of proof on the government—a remedy that is not available through the administrative process. See Docket Item 1 at 4, 15. Instead, the bond hearing Gualan Saca would receive without this Court's intervention would put the burden on him, which this Court has held violates due process. See Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579, 596-601 (W.D.N.Y. 2025). Thus, "available remedies provide no genuine opportunity for adequate relief" and "administrative appeal would be futile." See Hernandez-Hernandez, 535 F. Supp. 3d at 150; see also id. ("[W]here a constitutionally inadequate bond hearing (or no bond hearing at all) has been provided, prudential exhaustion is generally not required."). Second, as Gualan Saca's counsel observed at oral argument, filing the petition prior to Gualan Saca's receiving a bond hearing was necessary to preserve his rights. Gualan Saca sought an order enjoining the respondents from transferring him out of this District, Docket Item 1 at 17, and the Court granted that request, Docket Item 4. If Gualan Saca had not applied for and received that relief, he may well have been transferred to a different jurisdiction in which he would be deemed ineligible for a bond hearing. Compare Barbosa da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61, 69 (2d Cir. 2026) (holding that "noncitizens[] who are present in the United States after entering the country without inspection and admission, and who were not apprehended while entering the country or shortly thereafter" are not subject to mandatory detention under section 1225(b)(2)(A) and are eligible for bond hearings under section 1226(a)), with Buenrostro-Mendez v. Bondi, 166 F.4th 494, 498 (5th Cir. 2026) (reaching the opposite conclusion). And because transfer prior to a bond hearing would have caused "irreparable injury," see Hernandez-Hernandez, 535 F. Supp. 3d at 150, that also favors prudential waiver of the exhaustion requirement. Finally, the Court finds that the petition "raised a substantial constitutional question" that also warrants waiving the exhaustion requirement. See id. For all those reasons, this Court denies the motion to dismiss, Docket Item 6, and grants the petitioner's request for a constitutionally adequate bond hearing. For the reasons explained in Alvarez Ortiz, this Court ORDERS the respondents to provide the petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven calendar days of the date of this order. At that hearing, the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk. At that bond hearing, the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. If the respondents fail to provide such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release the petitioner. On or before 8/14/2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that the petitioner has either been granted a bond hearing in compliance with this order or released from custody. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/6/2026. (RFI) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#15

Aug 11, 2026

NOTICE by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney re 14 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Terminate Motions,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, of Bond Hearing (Attachments: # 1 Order of the Immigration Judge)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 08/11/2026)

#16

Aug 13, 2026

MOTION to Enforce Judgment by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Affidavit Attorney Affirmation, # 3 Exhibit "A", # 4 Exhibit "B")(Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 08/13/2026)

#17

Aug 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 16 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. Response due 9/2/2026. Reply due 9/9/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/26/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 08/26/2026)

#18

Sep 02, 2026

RESPONSE in Opposition re 16 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#19

Sep 02, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 16 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. Virtual Oral Argument set for 9/11/2026 at 2:30 PM in U.S. District Court, Niagara Courtroom, 8th Floor West, 2 Niagara Square, Buffalo, NY before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo. Dial-in instructions will be sent directly to the parties. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/2/2026. (CMD) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#20

Sep 10, 2026

MOTION for Leave to File Reply to Government's opposition by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Reply)(Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 09/10/2026)

#21

Sep 11, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 20 MOTION for Leave to File Reply to Government's opposition filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. The Court will consider the petitioner's reply, Docket Item [20-1], in deciding the motion to enforce. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/11/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/11/2026)

#22

Sep 11, 2026

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo: Oral Argument re 16 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca held on 9/11/2026. Court ordered that this proceeding is not to be recorded, or taped in any way. If someone does record it, they will be found in contempt of court. After hearing from parties, the Court ordered the respondents to provide the petitioner with a new bond hearing. A text order will be issued. Based on Attorney Guitierrez's request, petitioner shall file a discreet submission by 9/14/2026 specifically noting which portions of the petition he is seeking to amend. Respondents' response is due by 9/24/2026. Appearances. For petitioner: Mario Guitierrez and Matthew Borowski. For respondents: AUSA Chelsea Cruz. (Court Reporter Laurel Tubbs.) (CMD) (Entered: 09/11/2026)

#23

Sep 14, 2026

MOTION for Leave to File Leave to Amend by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca.(Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#24

Sep 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting 16 MOTION to Enforce Judgment filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca.On 8/14/2026, this Court denied the respondents' motion to dismiss the petition for a writ of habeas corpus brought in this case and granted the petition in part. Docket Item 14 . More specifically, the Court ordered the respondents to provide the petitioner, Julio Fermin Gualan Saca, with a "constitutionally adequate bond hearing" at which the "government [would] bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that [Gualan Saca] is a danger to the community or a flight risk." Id. At that hearing, the immigration judge also was to "consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, [Gualan Saca]'s ability to pay." Id.On 8/7/2026, Gualan Saca was given a bond hearing before an immigration judge. Docket Item 15 . The immigration judge denied bond, finding that the government met its burden to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that Gualan Saca is a danger to the community and that "no non-bond alternatives to detention... could address... th[at] risk." Docket Item [18-1] at 25-26 (hearing transcript); Docket Item [15-1] (Order of the Immigration Judge).On 8/13/2026, Gualan Saca moved to enforce this Court's order, arguing that his bond hearing did not comply with this Court's direction. Docket Item 16 . After the government responded, Docket Item 18, and Gualan Saca replied, Docket Item 20, this Court held oral argument on the motion to enforce, see Docket Item 22 .The Court has now carefully reviewed the parties' submissions and the transcript of the bond hearing. See Docket Items 16, 18, and 20 . And the Court agrees with Gualan Saca that he did not receive a bond hearing that complied with this Court's order, Docket Item 14 .At the bond hearing, the immigration judge found that the government met its burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Gualan Saca is a danger to the community based solely on his prior arrest for Driving While Intoxicated ("DWI"). Docket Item [18-1] at 24-25 (the immigration judge's "determin[ation] that based on [a] 2024 DWI arrest that [Gualan Saca] pose[s] a danger to the community"). But there was "[n]o disposition" for that arrest, and Gualan Saca has no other criminal history. See Docket Item [7-2] at 7 (Gualan Saca's I-213). In other words, the immigration judge found that Gualan Saca is a danger to the community based only on an arrest without knowing what—if anything—resulted from that arrest. And because an arrest indicates nothing more than that there was probable cause to believe Gualan Saca drove while intoxicated, that alone cannot possibly satisfy the much higher standard of clear and convincing evidence.In reaching this decision, this Court recognizes that it is not its responsibility to decide whether the immigration judge's decision was correct. See Apollinaire v. Barr, 2019 WL 4023560, at *3 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2019) (explaining that the Courts role in reviewing a motion to enforce "is narrow: it is to determine whether [the r]espondent[s] complied with the [Courts o]rder, not to review the hearing evidence de novo and determine whether [the p]etitioner" should be released (italics omitted)); see also Sol v. I.N.S., 274 F.3d 648, 651 (2d Cir. 2001) (holding that "federal jurisdiction over [section] 2241 petitions does not extend to review of discretionary determinations by the [immigration judge]"). Indeed, this Court has not interfered with a number of immigration judges' decisions that this Court may have made differently. See, e.g., Delwar v. Ball et al., Case No. 26-cv-1167, Docket Item 17 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2026); Gonzalez Ortega v. Ball, Case No. 26-cv-897, Docket Item 30 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2026). Rather, it is the job of this Court simply to decide whether Gualan Saca was given the process that the Court found he was due. And based on the record of the immigration court proceedings, he was not. Therefore, Gualan Saca's bond hearing did not comply with the Court's prior order and GRANTS his motion to enforce, Docket Item 16 . Within 7 days of the date of this order, the respondents shall provide Gualan Saca with a new bond hearing. At that hearing, the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that Gualan Saca is a danger to the community or a flight risk, and the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, Gualan Saca's ability to pay. Id. If the respondents fail to provide such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release Gualan Saca. On or before 9/23/2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that Gualan Saca has either been granted a bond hearing in compliance with this order or released from custody.Gualan Saca also has moved for leave to amend the petition. See Docket Item 23 ; Docket Item 18 ; Docket Item 11 . The respondents may respond on or before 9/24/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/15/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#25

Sep 22, 2026

NOTICE by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney re 24 Text Order, Terminate Motions, of rescheduled bond hearing (Attachments: # 1 Notice)(Cruz, Chelsea) Modified text to remove extra comas on 9/23/2026 (RE). (Entered: 09/22/2026)

#26

Sep 22, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 25 Notice (Other) Request for Immediate Release filed by Julio Fermin Gualan Saca. (Gutierrez, Mario) (Entered: 09/22/2026)

#27

Sep 24, 2026

TEXT ORDER: On 9/22/2026, the respondents filed a letter indicating that the "there was an issue with service of the hearing notice on [the p]etitioner and his counsel," and that the petitioner "requested a continuance of the bond hearing so that his counsel could be properly notified." Docket Item 25 at 1. The bond hearing was rescheduled for 9/23/2026. In light of the rescheduled bond hearing, the petitioner requests immediate release "pursuant to the express terms of this Court's September 15, 2026 [o]rder, Docket Item 24." The Court clarifies that a continuation of the bond hearing based on the petitioner's request to a date beyond the date provided in this Court's order, Docket Item 24, so that his counsel could be properly notified would not violate that order. Accordingly, the petitioner's request for immediate release is denied. The respondents shall file a status report on or before 9/25/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/24/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/24/2026)

#28

Sep 24, 2026

NOTICE by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney re 24 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Terminate Motions,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, of bond hearing (Attachments: # 1 Order of the Immigration Judge)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/24/2026)

#29

Sep 24, 2026

RESPONSE in Opposition re 23 MOTION for Leave to File Leave to Amend filed by James Bausch, Todd Blanche, Todd Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Philip Rhoney. (Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/24/2026)