Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-01440

#1

Jul 15, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5902777.), filed by Jean Carlos Aguero Gonzalez. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Hartman, Theodore) (Attachment 1 replaced on 7/16/2026) (ARS). (Entered: 07/15/2026)

#2

Jul 16, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Jean Carlos Aguero Gonzalez 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 7/23/2026, 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. In their submission, the respondents also shall respond to the petitioner's assertion that his immediate release is justified because his detention without a warrant is unlawful under section 1226(a). SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/16/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 07/16/2026)

Jul 16, 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. 636(c) 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. (ARS)

Jul 16, 2026

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

#3

Jul 21, 2026

MOTION for Extension of Time to File by James Bausch, Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney.(Moar, Daniel) (Entered: 07/21/2026)

#4

Jul 21, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance of Government Attorney: Daniel Barrie Moar, appearing on behalf of James Bausch, Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. (Moar, Daniel) (Entered: 07/21/2026)

#5

Jul 22, 2026

TEXT ORDER granting the respondents' motion for an extension of time to respond until 8/6/2026, Docket Item 3 . SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 7/22/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#6

Aug 06, 2026

MOTION to Dismiss, MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by James Bausch, Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum in Support, # 2 Declaration John Kloosterman, # 3 Exhibit A)(Moar, Daniel) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#7

Aug 10, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 6 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney, Todd Lyons, James Bausch, Pamela Bondi. Response due 8/17/2026. The respondents may reply by 8/21/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/10/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

#8

Aug 11, 2026

RESPONSE to Motion re 6 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Jean Carlos Aguero Gonzalez. (Hartman, Theodore) (Entered: 08/11/2026)

#9

Aug 11, 2026

Letter filed by James Bausch, Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem, Philip Rhoney . (Moar, Daniel) (Entered: 08/11/2026)

#10

Aug 11, 2026

TEXT ORDER: On 8/6/2026, the respondents moved to dismiss the petition for habeas corpus relief brought by Jean Carlos Aguero Gonzalez. Docket Item 6 . In their motion, they say that the issuance of "a Visa Waiver program Final Administrative Removal Order... renders [the petitioner's] pre-final order claims moot" and "any post-final order claims premature." Docket Item 6-1 at 1. In response, petitioner Aguero Gonzalez says that he "does not oppose the motion and wishes to return to his native country." Docket Item 8 at 2. The Court is inclined to construe Aguero Gonzalez's response as a notice of voluntary dismissal and therefore to dismiss his petition without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). See United States v. Acquest Wehrle, LLC, 2017 WL 6387801, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 1, 2017) ("Rule 41(a)(2) allows a district court to accept a plaintiff's voluntary dismissal upon terms and conditions that the court deems proper."); see also Pouliot v. Paul Arpin Van Lines, Inc., 235 F.R.D. 537, 540 (D. Conn. 2006) ("[I]n light of Rule 41(a)(2)'s statement that voluntary dismissal by order of the court is without prejudice unless the court orders otherwise, the Court assumes that [plaintiff] has agreed only to voluntary dismissal without prejudice."). But because the respondents have indicated that they intend to remove Aguero Gonzalez to Spain and not to Venezuela, his native country, Docket Item 6-2 ¶¶ 5, 12, Aguero Gonzalez's reference to his "native country," Docket Item 8 at 2, gives the Court pause. Therefore, Aguero Gonzalez shall clarify by 5:00 PM on 8/12/2026 whether he still does not oppose the motion to dismiss in light of the respondents' intent to remove him to Spain. If he does not do so, the Court will construe his response, Docket Item 8, as a notice of voluntary dismissal, dismiss his petition without prejudice, and close the case. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/11/2026. (ZHM) (Entered: 08/11/2026)

#11

Aug 12, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 10 Text Order,,,,,,,, filed by Jean Carlos Aguero Gonzalez. (Hartman, Theodore) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

#12

Aug 13, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In light of the petitioner's clarification that he "prefers removal to Spain" and "is ready to be removed," Docket Item 11 at 2, the Court construes that letter and his earlier submission, Docket Item 8, as a notice of voluntary dismissal and DISMISSES his petition without prejudice. The respondents' motion to dismiss the petition, Docket Item 6, is DENIED without prejudice as moot. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/13/2026. (ZHM)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 08/13/2026)