Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-01658

#1

Aug 07, 2026

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5935662.), filed by Fernando Carlos Dos Reis. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#2

Aug 07, 2026

Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order to prevent movement outside of the jurisdiction by Fernando Carlos Dos Reis.(Borowski, Matthew) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

Aug 07, 2026

Case assigned to Hon. John L. Sinatra, Jr. Notification to chambers of online civil opening. (LB)

#3

Aug 10, 2026

TEXT ORDER. Through counsel, Petitioner filed a petition seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Dkt. 1. He also moved for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction ("TRO/PI") enjoining Respondents from moving him outside of the Western District of New York during these proceedings. Dkt. 2. There is no need to interfere with the Department of Homeland Security's authority to "arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal[,]" under Title 8, United States Code, Section 1231(g)(1), because this Court will retain jurisdiction over Petitioner's habeas petition regardless of where he is transferred. See Santillanes v. U.S. Parole Comm'n, 754 F.2d 887, 888 (10th Cir. 1985) ("It is well established that jurisdiction attaches on the initial filing for habeas corpus relief, and it is not destroyed by a transfer of the petitioner and the accompanying custodial change."). The Court has considered Petitioner's additional arguments, but those arguments do not entitle him to a TRO/PI here. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008) (moving party must establish: (1) a likelihood of irreparable harm absent preliminary relief; (2) a likelihood of success on the merits; (3) the balance of equities tipping in favor of the moving party; and (4) that the public interest is served by an injunction); see also Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, 602 U.S. 339, 346 (2024) ("The default rule is that a plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must make a clear showing that 'he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.'") (quoting Winter, 555 U.S. at 20); Jones v. Wolf, 467 F. Supp. 3d 74, 81 (W.D.N.Y. 2020) (the "same standard" governs consideration of an application for a temporary restraining order). Petitioner's motion for a TRO/PI (Dkt. 2), therefore, is denied. Respondents shall respond to the petition by August 24, 2026. Petitioner's response is due by August 31, 2026. In their filings, the parties shall address whether and how the Second Circuit's decision in Da Cunha v. Freden, 175 F.4th 61 (2d Cir. 2026), applies. The Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the petition (Dkt. 1) and this text order, electronically via a Notice of Electronic Filing to the United States Attorney's Office, Western District of New York at USANYW-Immigration-Habeas@usdoj.gov. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. John L. Sinatra, Jr., on 8/10/2026. (KEF) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

Aug 10, 2026

Remark. Chambers sent Dkt. 1 and Dkt. 3 to USANYW-Immigration-Habeas@usdoj.gov. (KEF)

Aug 10, 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)