District of New Jersey • 3:26-cv-08342

#1

Jul 07, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-17628753.), filed by DEVINDERPAL SINGH. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(DAHIYA, SUGANDHA) (Entered: 07/07/2026)

#2

Jul 07, 2026

TEXT ORDER. Respondents are hereby enjoined from transferring Petitioner from New Jersey pending further Order of the Court. So Ordered by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 7/7/2026. (jml, ) (Entered: 07/07/2026)

Jul 07, 2026

Add and Terminate Judges

Jul 07, 2026

Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order

Jul 07, 2026

Notice of Judicial Preferences

Jul 07, 2026

Notice of Judicial Preferences. Click here for the Judge's Individual Procedure Requirements. (jml, )

Jul 07, 2026

Judge Georgette Castner added. (jml, )

#3

Jul 09, 2026

Memorandum AND Order to Answer

#4

Jul 22, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#5

Jul 22, 2026

Response to Habeas Petition

#6

Aug 17, 2026

TEXT ORDER: This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's petition (Petition) for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (ECF No. 1 ), and Respondents' response (ECF No. 5 ). Petitioner alleges that his continued detention is unlawful because "ICE lacks statutory and constitutional authority to detain him indefinitely under these circumstances" (i.e., Petitioner is currently in removal proceedings arising from the denial of his Form I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, Petitioner has re-filed his Form I-751 petition, which remains pending, and, despite the pendency of the petition and the ongoing removal proceeding, "ICE officers took Mr. Singh into custody immediately upon his release from criminal custody, where he had been detained for investigation and questioning in connection with a criminal matter involving his retail business in New Jersey") and "[h]is ongoing confinement, without an individualized determination of whether continued detention is justified, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment." (ECF No. 1 Paras. 2-4; see also id. Para. 5 (asking the Court to order immediate release or require Respondents to provide Petitioner with a prompt and constitutionally adequate custody determination).) However, Petitioner, who entered the United States as a conditional resident, is subject to detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and may seek a bond hearing before an immigration judge ("IJ") pursuant to that statutory provision. (See ECF No. 1 Paras. 18, 52; ECF No. 5 at 1-3); Morales Guzman v. Blanche, No. 26-8184, 2026 WL 2145612, at *2 (D.N.J. July 27, 2026) ("Under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), the Government is authorized to detain, conditionally parole, or release an alien subject to removal proceedings prior to the issuance of a final order of removal." (citing Jennings v. Rodriguez, 583 U.S. 281, 288-89 (2018)); Faconda Shambi v. Soto, No. 26-8651, 2026 WL 2098815, at *2 (D.N.J. July 21, 2026) ("Respondents concede that Petitioner is being detained pursuant to § 1226(a), so he is entitled to request a bond hearing from the immigration courts."). "Immigration detainees seeking to invoke this Court's habeas jurisdiction... must exhaust all administrative remedies before they may seek habeas relief in federal court." Faconda Shambi, 2026 WL 2098815, at *2 (alteration in original) (quoting Jelani B. v. Anderson, No. 20-6459, 2020 WL 5560161, at *2 (D.N.J. Sept. 17, 2020)). Petitioner has not requested a bond hearing before an IJ, and accordingly he has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. (See ECF No. 5 at 2.) Although Petitioner indicates that exhaustion should be excused as "futile, inadequate, and incapable of providing timely relief," (ECF No. Para. 36), the Court finds that it would not be futile for Petitioner to avail himself of the administrative process made available to him to obtain release from detention. "Failure to exhaust will not be excused when it is a choice." Morales Guzman, 2026 WL 2145612, at *2 (noting that by choosing to skip the administrative process, a petitioner has delayed any relief that was available to him) (citing Hayes v. Ortiz, No. 20-5268, 2020 WL 3425291, at *5 (D.N.J. June 23, 2020)). Accordingly, the Petition (ECF No. 1 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Court LIFTS its Orders (ECF Nos. 3 & 5 ) enjoining Petitioner's transfer from the District of New Jersey, and his removal from the United States, pending further order of this Court. The Clerk of the Court shall CLOSE this matter.. So Ordered by Judge Georgette Castner on 8/17/2026. (jmh) (Entered: 08/17/2026)

Aug 17, 2026

Order of Dismissal AND Text Order