District of Massachusetts • 3:26-cv-13933

#1

Aug 27, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11987928 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Ramiro Velasco Barradas. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Category Form) (Miller, Jacob) Modified on 8/27/2026 (NVB). Modified on 8/27/2026 (NVB). (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#2

Aug 27, 2026

Case transferred to Western Division (Springfield) (NVB) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#3

Aug 27, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Mark G. Mastroianni assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Morgan. (MMR) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#4

Aug 27, 2026

Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: ORDER entered. EMERGENCY ORDER CONCERNING STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL. (MMR) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#5

Aug 27, 2026

Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: Electronic order entered. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2243 governing Sec. 2241 cases for service on respondents, the answer or responsive pleading is due by September 10, 2026. Respondents shall also include the petitioner's full alien file (A-file) from the Department of Homeland Security. If the A-file is unavailable, the government shall include all documents within its possession, custody, or control which reflects any asserted reason for petitioner's continued detention. (TF) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#6

Aug 27, 2026

NOTICE by Ramiro Velasco Barradas VIOLATION OF STAY ORDER AND RISK OF IMMINENT REMOVAL (Miller, Jacob) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#7

Aug 27, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Hearing: Status Conference set for 8/28/2026 at 12:00 PM in Remote Proceeding : Springfield before Judge Mark G. Mastroianni. This hearing will be conducted by video conference. Counsel of record will receive a video conference invite at the email registered in CM/ECF. If you have technical or compatibility issues with the technology, please notify the courtroom deputy of the session as soon as possible.Audio access to the hearing may be available to the media and public. Please check the Court schedule. In order to gain access to the hearing, you must sign up at the following address: https://forms.mad.uscourts.gov/courtlist.html.For questions regarding access to hearings, you may refer to the general orders and public notices of the Court available on www.mad.uscourts.gov or contact the session here. (CR) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

Aug 27, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

Aug 27, 2026

Notice of Hearing

Aug 27, 2026

Order

Aug 27, 2026

Case Transferred Out - Divisional Transfer

#8

Aug 28, 2026

NOTICE by Ramiro Velasco Barradas re 6 Notice (Other) CONFIRMED LOCATION (Miller, Jacob) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#9

Aug 28, 2026

Electronic Clerk's Notes for proceedings held before Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: Status Conference held on 8/28/2026. (Attorneys present: Atty Miller, AUSA Farquhar) Colloquy re: status of case. Court accepts the government's recitation of facts for the purposes of this hearing. For reasons stated during hearing, the Court will transfer case to the District of New York. A separate order shall issue. (Court Reporter: Leigh Gershowitz at Leigh_Gershowitz@mad.uscourts.gov.) (CR) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#10

Aug 28, 2026

NOTICE by Ramiro Velasco Barradas SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY (Miller, Jacob) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#11

Aug 28, 2026

NOTICE by Ramiro Velasco Barradas re 10 Notice (Other) (Miller, Jacob) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#12

Aug 28, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Rayford A. Farquhar on behalf of Michael Krol, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling (Farquhar, Rayford) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#13

Aug 28, 2026

Judge Mark G. Mastroianni: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. ORDER entered transferring 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus to the Western District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1631. Having considered the petition filed as well as the facts developed during the August 28, 2026, hearing, the court grants the government's request, made during the hearing, to transfer this action to the Western District of New York. On the morning of August 27, 2026, Petitioner, along with Carlos Eduardo Roa Miranda, the petitioner in Roa Miranda v. Wesling et al., 26-cv-30149, was picked up in Pittsfield, Massachusetts, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") Enforcement Removal Operations ("ERO") Officers assigned to an ICE field office in New York. Petitioner was then briefly taken to the Albany Field Office, approximately one hour from Pittsfield, Massachusetts, before being transported to an ICE facility in Buffalo, New York, where he is currently detained. When Petitioner filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus (at approximately 10:05 AM on August 27, 2026), he was already in New York. Although the court rejects Petitioner Ramiro Velasco Barradas's suggestion that he is detained in the District of Massachusetts, the court believes his counsel took that position in good faith based on the information available to counsel regarding Petitioner's whereabouts during an ever-changing situation.Because Petitioner was detained in New York when he filed the petition, and later detained at the ICE facility in Buffalo, New York, this court lacks jurisdiction over his habeas petition. "[T]he 'immediate custodian' rule, which states that 'in habeas challenges to present physical confinement-- 'core challenges'-- the default rule is that the proper respondent is the warden of the facility where the prisoner is being held, not the Attorney General or some other remote supervisory official.'" Tham v. Adducci, 319 F. Supp. 3d 574, 576 (D. Mass. 2018) (quoting Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 435 (2004)). Based on the facts presently available to the court, no exception to the "immediate custodian" rule applies here. See Vasquez v. Reno, 233 F.3d 688, 696 (1st Cir. 2000) (discussing the "extraordinary circumstances" when a supervisory immigration official may be named as respondent, including where there are facts suggesting "bad faith" or "furtiveness," such as the Department of Homeland Security moving a noncitizen form one site to another "in an attempt to manipulate jurisdiction"). Accordingly, the court applies the "general rule that for core habeas petitions challenging present physical confinement, jurisdiction lies in only one district: the district of confinement." Padilla, 542 U.S. at 443. As David Wesling, ICE Boston Acting Field Office Director, and Michael Krol, HSI New England Special Agent in Charge are no longer appropriate respondents, the court finds it does not have jurisdiction over Petitioner's writ of habeas petition. That conclusion does not require dismissal. When a federal court lacks jurisdiction, it may transfer the case to another federal court that does have jurisdiction if it is in the interest of justice to do so. See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1631; see also Ozturk v. Trump, 777 F. Supp. 3d 26, 43 (D. Mass. 2025) (finding that courts in the "First Circuit ha[ve] recognized that Section 1631 applies in the context of habeas petitioners" (citing Tham v. Adducci, 319 F. Supp. 3d 574, 577 (D. Mass. 2018); DeCarvalho v. Moniz, No. 21-cv-11946-WGY, 2021 WL 5811301, at *1 (D. Mass. Dec. 7, 2021)). Indeed, the First Circuit has recognized a "transfer is presumptively preferable because the dismissal of an action or appeal that might thrive elsewhere is not only resource-wasting but also justice-defeating." Britell v. United States, 318 F.3d 70, 74 (1st Cir. 2003) (citing CruzAguilera v. INS, 245 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir.2001)). This is not a case where transfer would "unfairly benefit the proponent" or "unduly burden the judicial system." Id. Accordingly, based on a totality of the circumstances, the case is transferred. See id. Once transferred, "the action or appeal shall proceed as if it had been filed in or noticed for the court to which it transferred on the date upon which it was actually filed in or noticed for the court from which it is transferred." 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1631; see Ozturk, 777 F. Supp. 3d at 43. Here, the transferee court should treat the Petition as filed in the Western District of New York on August 27, 2026, at 10:05 AM. The Western District of New York may modify the deadlines set forth in this court's August 27, 2026, order as needed. (MMR) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#14

Aug 28, 2026

Emergency MOTION for Reconsideration re 13 Order,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, by Ramiro Velasco Barradas.(Miller, Jacob) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

Aug 28, 2026

Status Conference

Aug 28, 2026

Order

Aug 31, 2026

Case Transferred Out - District Transfer

Aug 31, 2026

Order on Motion for Reconsideration