Western District of New York • 1:26-cv-01841

#1

Aug 26, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANYWDC-5962301.), filed by Goebbels Jeanniton. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Jatoba de Araujo, Annelise) (Entered: 08/26/2026)

#2

Aug 28, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Goebbels Jeanniton.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 Barbosa 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 9/4/2026, 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. Additionally, in Last Name Unknown v. Ball, 2026 WL 2096666, at *4 (W.D.N.Y. July 21, 2026), this Court held that a petitioner whose detention was governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) was entitled to immediate release when a warrant had not been obtained for his arrest. And in Loaeza v. Bausch, 2026 WL 2150155 (W.D.N.Y. July 27, 2026), Judge Vacca explained that "[w]ithout a valid [Notice to Appear] in place, removal proceedings are not pending, and [the r]espondents have no authority to make an arrest or effectuate detention." Id. at *1-2. Accordingly, the respondents also shall SHOW CAUSE on or before 9/4/2026 why the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release under Last Name Unknown and/or Loaeza, including providing a copy of any warrant or Notice to Appear that the respondents say was issued. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 8/28/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

Aug 28, 2026

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

Aug 28, 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)

#3

Sep 04, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance of Government Attorney: Chelsea A. Cruz, appearing on behalf of Todd W. Blanche, Joseph E. Freden, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP. (Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/04/2026)

#4

Sep 04, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 2 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,,, filed by Todd W. Blanche, Joseph E. Freden, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/04/2026)

#5

Sep 08, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Goebbels Jeanniton.On 8/28/2026, this Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of this Court's decision in Alvarez Ortiz v. Freden, 808 F. Supp. 3d 579 (W.D.N.Y. 2025), "(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." Docket Item 2.The respondents agree that the petitioner is detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), however, they do not distinguish this case from Alvarez Ortiz. See Docket Item 4 at 2. Accordingly, for the reasons explained in Alvarez Ortiz, this Court GRANTS the petition in part and ORDERS the respondents to provide the petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge within seven calendar days of the date of this order. At that hearing, the government shall bear the burden to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner is a danger to the community or a flight risk. At that bond hearing, the immigration judge must consider non-bond alternatives to detention or, if setting a bond, the petitioner's ability to pay. If the respondents fail to provide such a hearing within seven calendar days, they shall immediately release the petitioner.On or before 9/15/2026, the respondents shall file a status report confirming that the petitioner has either been granted a bond hearing in compliance with this order or released from custody.Moreover, the Court ordered the respondents to show cause why, in light of this Court's decision in Last Name Unknown v. Ball, 2026 WL 2096666 (W.D.N.Y. July 21, 2026), and Judge Vaccas decision in Loaeza v. Bausch, 2026 WL 2150155 (W.D.N.Y. July 27, 2026), "the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release... [,] including providing a copy of any warrant or Notice to Appear that the respondents say was issued." In response, the respondents give several reasons why the petitioner is not entitled to immediate release. See Docket Item 4 at 4-7. The Court finds that further briefing is necessary for its consideration of the petitioners request for immediate release. Accordingly, on or before 9/11/2026, the petitioner shall reply to the respondents arguments, Docket Item 4 at 4-7, in support of his request for immediate release. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/8/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#6

Sep 14, 2026

REPLY/RESPONSE to re 5 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,, filed by Goebbels Jeanniton. (Jatoba de Araujo, Annelise) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#7

Sep 14, 2026

Consent MOTION for Leave to File Response and Accept Late Filing by Goebbels Jeanniton.(Jatoba de Araujo, Annelise) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#8

Sep 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The petitioner's consent motion to accept late filing, Docket Item 7, is GRANTED. The respondents shall reply to the petitioner's submission regarding immediate release, Docket Item 6, by 9/22/2026. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/15/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#9

Sep 15, 2026

NOTICE by Todd W. Blanche, Joseph E. Freden, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella re 5 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,, of rescheduled bond hearing (Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#10

Sep 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 9 Notice (Other) filed by Markwayne Mullin, Joseph E. Freden, Todd W. Blanche, David Venturella.The Court clarifies that a continuation of the bond hearing based on the petitioner's request to a date beyond the date provided in this Court's order, Docket Item 5, would not violate that order. The respondents shall file a status report within 24 hours of the bond hearing once it takes place. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/15/2026. (DDC) (Entered: 09/15/2026)

#11

Sep 16, 2026

NOTICE by Todd W. Blanche, Joseph E. Freden, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella re 5 Text Order,,,,,,,,,,, of Bond Hearing (Attachments: # 1 Order of the Immigration Judge)(Cruz, Chelsea) (Entered: 09/16/2026)

#12

Sep 17, 2026

TEXT ORDER re 11 Notice (Other) filed by Markwayne Mullin, Joseph E. Freden, Todd W. Blanche, David Venturella.The respondents have filed a letter, Docket Item 11, indicating that an immigration judge held a bond hearing in compliance with this Court's order, Docket Item 5, and that the petitioner was ordered released on bond. If either party believes there are any further issues properly before this Court, that party may show cause within 14 days of this order. If neither party shows cause why issues remain before this Court within 14 days, the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and close this case without further order. The respondents' deadline to reply the petitioner's submission regarding immediate release, see Docket Item 8, is suspended. SO ORDERED. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/17/2026. (DDC)Clerk to Follow up (Entered: 09/17/2026)