District of New Jersey • 1:26-cv-12067

JUAN DIEGO v. GRIMES

Active

Case Information

Filed: September 14, 2026
Assigned to: Christine P. O'Hearn
Referred to:
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Active
Last Activity: September 17, 2026
Parties: View All Parties →

Docket Entries

#1
Sep 14, 2026
PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-17936871.), filed by JUANA JUAN DIEGO. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(MARANDETT, RACHEL) (Entered: 09/14/2026)
Main Document: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#2
Sep 14, 2026
TEXT ORDER. Respondents are hereby enjoined from transferring Petitioner from New Jersey pending further Order of the Court. So Ordered by Chief Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 9/14/2026. (jml, ) (Entered: 09/14/2026)
Sep 14, 2026
Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order
Sep 14, 2026
Judge Christine P. O'Hearn added. (jml, )
Sep 14, 2026
Add and Terminate Judges
#3
Sep 15, 2026
TEXT ORDER: The Court is in receipt of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in which Petitioner alleges that they are being unlawfully detained without a bond hearing. If Petitioner was initially detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2), their detention is unlawful under Buele Morocho v. Warden Phila. FDC, No. 26-1150, 2026 WL 2546223 (3d Cir. Aug. 28, 2026), and Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner from custody under the same conditions that existed before their current detention, return all property to them, and promptly file a letter on the docket so confirming. If not released, within three (3) calendar days of this Order, Respondents shall file a letter on the docket addressing whether Petitioner: (1) has a criminal history warranting mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c); (2) is subject to a final order of removal; or (3) was initially detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and afforded a bond hearing. Respondents are further reminded that the Court will not accept a "post hoc justification[] for detention." Arias Gudino v. Lowe, 785 F. Supp. 3d 27, 46 n.8 (M.D. Pa. 2025); cf. Marshall v. Lansing, 839 F.2d 933, 943-44 (3d Cir. 1988) ("A court must review the agency's actual on-the-record reasoning process... not a post hoc rationalization, or agency counsel's in-court reasoning."). Accordingly, if Respondents contend that § 1226(a) supplied the authority for Petitioner's detention from the outset, they must provide competent proof establishing that fact. So Ordered by Judge Christine P. O'Hearn on 9/15/2026. (hem, ) (Entered: 09/15/2026)
Sep 15, 2026
Text Order
#4
Sep 16, 2026
Letter
Main Document: Letter
#5
Sep 17, 2026
Notice of Appearance
Main Document: Notice of Appearance
#6
Sep 17, 2026
Letter
Main Document: Letter