Western District of Pennsylvania • 3:26-cv-01610

#1

Aug 14, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5, Receipt Number 111), filed by Darwin Leonardo Garcia Reyes. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Memorandum in Support of Petition, # 3 Exhibit List, # 4 Exhibit A - Declaration and Identity Documentation of Petitioner, # 5 Exhibit B - Immigration Custody and Pending Proceedings, # 6 Exhibit C - Evidence of Residence and Community Ties, # 7 Exhibit D - Sponsorship and Release Support, # 8 Exhibit E - Family and Community Support Letters) (ea) (Entered: 08/14/2026)

#2

Aug 14, 2026

MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Darwin Leonardo Garcia Reyes. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Certificate of Service) (ea) (Entered: 08/14/2026)

#3

Aug 17, 2026

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C.§ 2241 is TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case. Signed by Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann on 8/17/2026. (ea) (Entered: 08/18/2026)

#4

Aug 18, 2026

Case transferred in from District of Pennsylvania Middle; Case Number 4:26-cv-02345. Original file with documents numbered 1 - 3, certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. (Entered: 08/18/2026)

Aug 18, 2026

Judge Stephanie L. Haines added. (ert)

#5

Aug 19, 2026

TEXT ORDER: Petitioner's 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED. Petitioner seeks to enjoin transfer from the Moshannon Valley Processing Center and to restrain Respondents from effectuating his removal pending the proceedings in this case. This Court lacks authority to grant that relief as the places of detention for aliens pending removal is left to the discretion of the Attorney General. 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1). Congress has "limited federal district courts' jurisdiction to review decisions or actions made pursuant to the sound discretion of DHS officials[.]" Jane v. Rodriguez, No. CV 20-5922 (ES), 2020 WL 10140953, at *1 (D.N.J. May 22, 2020). 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1)(B)(ii) provides that "no court shall have jurisdiction to review any decision or action of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security the authority for which is specified under this subchapter to be in the discretion of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security...." And, in 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1), Congress clearly set forth that: "[t]he Attorney General shall arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal." In this way, § 1231(g)(1) establishes that:[T]he place of detention is left to the discretion of the Attorney General. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1) ("The Attorney General shall arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a decision on removal."); Gandarillas-Zambrana v. BIA, 44 F.3d 1251, 1256 (4th Cir.1995) ("The INS necessarily has the authority to determine the location of detention of an alien in deportation proceedings... and therefore, to transfer aliens from one detention center to another."); Rios Berrios v. INS, 776 F.2d 859, 863 (9th Cir.1985) ("We are not saying that the petitioner should not have been transported to Florida. That is within the province of the Attorney General to decide."); Sasso v. Milhollan, 735 F.Supp. 1045, 1046 (S.D.Fla.1990) (holding that the Attorney General has discretion over location of detention). Sinclair v. Attorney General of U.S., 198 F. Appx 218, 222 n.3 (3d Cir. 2006). See Calla-Collado v. Attorney General of U.S., 663 F.3d 680, 685 (3d Cir. 2011) ("Congress has vested the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") with authority to enforce the nation's immigration laws. Thus, as a part of DHS, ICE 'necessarily has the authority to determine the location of detention of an alien in deportation proceedings and therefore, to transfer aliens from one detention center to another.'") (quoting Gandarillas-Zambrana v. Bd. Of Immigration Appeals, 44 F.3d 1251, 1256 (4th Cir. 1995)). Therefore, because this Court lacks jurisdiction to enjoin Respondents from transferring Petitioner or interfering with removal proceedings, it will DENY Petitioner's request for a T.R.O. Signed by Judge Stephanie L. Haines on 8/19/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (cag) (Entered: 08/19/2026)

#6

Aug 19, 2026

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: The Court orders as follows: 1. Service. The Court hereby notifies Petitioner that copies of this order and the Petition were emailed by the Court to the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Pennsylvania this day. This email service is deemed sufficient to accomplish formal service of the Petition on Respondents. 2. Respondents' counsel notice of appearances. Counsel for Respondents shall file a notice of appearance within 3 days of this date. 3. Respondents' responses to the petition. Respondents shall file any responses or answers to the petition within 30 days of the date of service. Responses are limited to 25 pages, double-spaced. 4. Petitioner's reply in support of the petition. Petitioner shall file any reply in support of the petition within 8 days of the filing of Respondents' response to the petition. The Reply is limited to 5 pages, double-spaced. Signed by Judge Stephanie L. Haines on 8/19/2026. (dlg) (Entered: 08/19/2026)

Aug 19, 2026

Order on Motion for TRO