District of Colorado • 1:26-cv-03307

#1

Jul 21, 2026

APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 USC 2241 (Filing fee $ 5, Receipt Number ACODC-11157451)Attorney Jessica A. Dawgert added to party Jose Munoz(pty:pet), filed by Jose Munoz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit Exhibit 7, # 8 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Dawgert, Jessica) (Entered: 07/21/2026)

#2

Jul 21, 2026

Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Timothy P O'Hara. Text Only Entry. (jberr, ) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#3

Jul 22, 2026

Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 40.1, direct assignment of civil actions to full time magistrate judges. (jberr, ) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#4

Jul 24, 2026

CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Petitioner Jose Munoz All parties do not consent.. (Dawgert, Jessica) (Entered: 07/24/2026)

#5

Jul 28, 2026

Show Cause

#6

Jul 28, 2026

Order Reassigning Case

#7

Jul 29, 2026

MINUTE ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner Jose Munoz's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, ECF No. 1, and Motion for an Order to Show Cause or Alternatively Status, ECF No. 5. In the Petition, Petitioner requests that the Court order Petitioner's "immediate release [from immigration detention] with all of his personal property, including any driver's license, passport, employment authorization documents, and any identification cards." Id. at 19. In the Motion, Petitioner requests that the Court issue an order to show cause regarding the assignment of a government attorney to this matter. ECF No. 5 at 1-2. Having reviewed the filings, the Court ORDERS Petitioner to, no later than two calendar days from the entry of this Order, (1) serve Respondents with copies of the Petition, the Motion and any accompanying papers, along with a copy of this Order, by e-mail and by overnight mail pursuant to the service requirements outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i); and (2) promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for Respondents shall promptly enter notices of appearance. Within five (5) calendar days of service, Respondents are ORDERED TO RESPOND to the Petition and are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to why the Petition should not be granted. See, e.g., Yassine v. Collins, No. 1:25-cv-00786-ADA-SH, 2025 WL 1954064, at *1 (W.D. Tex. July 7, 2025) (explaining that while § 2243 refers to a three day deadline, this requirement is "subordinate to the district court's authority to set deadlines" itself, and granting respondents a fourteen day deadline to respond in order to "give [r]espondents adequate time to brief the issues" (quotations omitted)). Further, pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and in order to preserve the Court's jurisdiction, Respondents SHALL NOT REMOVE Petitioner from the District of Colorado or the United States unless or until this Court or the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit vacates this Order. See also Vizguerra-Ramirez v. Choate, et. al, Case No. 1:25-cv-881, D. Colo., ECF No. 11 at 45 (collecting cases); F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 603 (1966); Local 1814, Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n v. New York Shipping Ass'n, 965 F.2d 1224, 1237 (2d Cir. 1992). By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 7/29/2026. Text Only Entry (cnsja, ) (Entered: 07/29/2026)

Jul 29, 2026

Minute Order

#8

Jul 30, 2026

CERTIFICATE of Mailing/Service re 1 Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 7 Minute Order,,,,,,,,, by Petitioner Jose Munoz. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit proof of service)(Dawgert, Jessica) (Entered: 07/30/2026)

#9

Jul 31, 2026

Clarify

#10

Jul 31, 2026

ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner's Unopposed Motion for Clarification. ECF No. 9 . In it, the parties seek clarification of the Court's order directing Petitioner to serve his habeas petition and other documents "by e-mail and by overnight mail pursuant to the service requirements outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i)." ECF No. 7. However, Petitioner notes that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i) requires service via "registered or certified mail," which does not have an overnight option. To ensure Petitioner has effectuated proper service, it is paramount that he comply with Rule 4(i)'s service requirements. The reference to "overnight" mail in the Court's order was not intended to conflict with Rule 4(i) and was included simply to emphasize the speed with which service should take place. Based on Respondents' representations in the unopposed motion, it appears that service is now complete. ECF No. 9 at 2. Accordingly, Petitioner's motion, ECF No. 9, is DENIED AS MOOT. Respondents are ORDERED to respond the Court's order to show cause, ECF No. 7, on or before August 5, 2026. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 7/31/2026. Text Only Entry(cnsja, ) (Entered: 07/31/2026)

Jul 31, 2026

Order on Motion to Clarify

#11

Aug 04, 2026

RESPONSE to 10 Order on Motion to Clarify,,,, by Respondents Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George ValdezAttorney Winnie Wu added to party Juan Baltazar(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party Todd Blanche(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party Markwayne Mullin(pty:res), Attorney Winnie Wu added to party George Valdez(pty:res). (Wu, Winnie) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#12

Aug 04, 2026

REPLY to 11 Response, by Petitioner Jose Munoz. (Dawgert, Jessica) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#13

Aug 04, 2026

MINUTE ORDER: Before the Court is Petitioner's habeas petition, ECF No. 1, and Respondents' Response to it, ECF No. 11. Petitioner has also filed a reply brief. ECF No. 12. In the response, Respondents state that they "are not submitting a brief in opposition to the Petition...." ECF No. 11 at 1. In light of the representation in Respondents' response, as well as the Tenth Circuit's recent decision holding that § 1225's mandatory detention provision does not apply to noncitizens who are apprehended while in the interior of the United States, see Santillan Quiroz v. Mullin, et. al, No. 26-6019, --- F.4th ---, 2026 WL 1876709, at *17 (10th Cir. June 30, 2026), the Court GRANTS Petitioner's habeas petition, ECF No. 1. It is ORDERED that Respondents shall release Petitioner from custody immediately, but no later than within 24 hours of this Order, and may not impose any additional conditions of release or supervision beyond those he was subject to immediately prior to his recent detention. Respondents SHALL FILE a status report within TWO DAYS of this Order to certify compliance. Respondents are further ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining Petitioner unless Respondents demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence at a pre-deprivation bond hearing, that Petitioner is a flight risk or danger to the community such that his physical custody is legally justified. At any such bond hearing, the government shall bear the burden of proof. The Court notes that, while Respondents contend that a bond hearing is the appropriate remedy, see ECF No. 11 at 2, this argument fail to persuade. Compare ECF No. 11 at 2, with Santillan Quiroz, 2026 WL 1876709 819, *17 n.13; see also, e.g., Singh v. Baltazar, 819 F. Supp. 3d 1247, 125051 (D. Colo. 2026). By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 8/4/2026. Text Only Entry (cnsja, ) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

Aug 04, 2026

Minute Order

#14

Aug 05, 2026

ORDER finding as moot 5 Motion for Order to Show Cause. See ECF No. 13. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 8/4/2026. Text Only Entry(cnsja, ) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#15

Aug 05, 2026

STATUS REPORT by Respondents Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George Valdez. (Wu, Winnie) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

Aug 05, 2026

Order on Motion to Show Cause