Western District of Pennsylvania • 3:26-cv-00378

#1

Mar 05, 2026

MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by MICHAEL ENCARNCACION. (Attachments: # 1 Habeas Petition lodged pending disposition of IFP Motion, # 2 Envelope) (cel) (Entered: 03/06/2026)

Mar 06, 2026

Judge William S. Stickman added. (cel)

#2

Mar 09, 2026

ORDER OF COURT. 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to file the petition. Signed by Judge William S. Stickman on 03/09/26. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (eca) (Entered: 03/09/2026)

#3

Mar 09, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by MICHAEL ENCARNCACION. (cel) (Entered: 03/09/2026)

Mar 09, 2026

Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

#4

Mar 10, 2026

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. Signed by Judge William S. Stickman on 03/10/26. A copy of this order and a copy of the petition will be emailed this day, 03/10/26. (eca) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#5

Mar 10, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Craig W. Haller on behalf of PAMELA BONDI, DAREN MARGOLIN, KRISTI NOEM, LEONARD ODDO, MICHAEL T. ROSE. (Haller, Craig) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#6

Mar 11, 2026

RESPONSE to 3 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by PAMELA BONDI, DAREN MARGOLIN, KRISTI NOEM, LEONARD ODDO, MICHAEL T. ROSE. (Haller, Craig) (Entered: 03/11/2026)

#7

Mar 12, 2026

Order

#8

Mar 12, 2026

Judgment (Rule 58)

#9

Mar 23, 2026

NOTICE of Outcome of Bond Hearing by PAMELA BONDI, DAREN MARGOLIN, KRISTI NOEM, LEONARD ODDO, MICHAEL T. ROSE (Haller, Craig) (Entered: 03/23/2026)

#10

Jun 29, 2026

Enforce

#11

Jun 30, 2026

ORDER DENYING 10 Motion to Enforce. The Court granted in part Petitioner's 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus and 7 ordered that he be provided an individualized bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226. He then received the ordered individualized bond hearing on March 19, 2026. The immigration judge determined that Petitioner posed a flight risk and denied bond. Petitioner takes issue with the fact that he was denied bond, and moves to enforce the Court's Order and for his release or a new bond hearing. 8 U.S.C. § 1226(e) provides, in relevant part, that no court may set aside any action or decision regarding detention or release of any alien. This divests district courts of the jurisdiction to reexamine the bond decisions of immigration judges. Nevertheless, two (unpublished) decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit have held that a district court may examine an alien's bond hearing to determine whether it fell below the minimum standards of due process. See Quinteras v. Warden Pike Cty. Corr. Fac., 784 F. App'x 75 (3d Cir. 2019); Ghanem v. Warden Essex Cty. Corr. Fac., 2022 WL 574624 (3d Cir. 2022). In this case there is no question that Petitioner received a bond hearing, as ordered. There is, likewise, no question that the stated reason for denial of bond was that he poses a flight risk. This determination is unreviewable under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(e). Nothing before the Court plausibly creates any inference that the bond hearing Petitioner received was procedurally deficient or otherwise violated due process. He was not deprived of a fundamentally fair bond hearing, and the Court holds that there is no merit to his motion. Signed by Judge William S. Stickman on 06/30/2026. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (rgm) (Entered: 06/30/2026)

Jun 30, 2026

Order on Motion to Enforce

#12

Jul 13, 2026

Enforce

#14

Jul 27, 2026

Miscellaneous Relief (Use ONLY if no other relief applies)

Aug 05, 2026

Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief