District of New Jersey • 2:26-cv-02944

#1

Mar 21, 2026

First PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus for Unlawfully Detained Noncitizen ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ANJDC-17222633.), filed by BOLIVAR A. GUERRERO JIMENEZ. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(SIMBRON, NOEMI) (Entered: 03/21/2026)

#2

Mar 21, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Petitioner shall not be removed from the state of New Jersey or from the United States. A bond hearing shall be conducted on or before March 24 at 5:00pm, unless, by March 24 at noon, the Respondents file a letter explaining either (i) that the Petitioner has asked to adjourn the bond hearing or (ii) that, due to relevant and meaningful procedural or factual distinctions, this case is not controlled by the Court's prior decisions in Chiquito Barzola v. Warden (2:25-cv-17326); Martinez Ron v. Lyons (2:25-cv-17359); Mboup v. Field Off. Dir. of N.J. Immigr. & Customs Enf't (2:25-cv-16882); and Ortega Alvarez v. Noem (2:25-cv-17401). The Respondents shall file a status update letter on or before March 25 at noon. In addition to what is set out above, a declaration from the United States Attorney's Office shall be filed on the schedule set out below. It shall indicate that the United States Attorney's Office has (i) received this Order and conveyed it to the appropriate personnel at ICE; and (ii) provided ICE with written legal advice on the subject of ICE's obligation to comply with this Order. A declaration from ICE shall also be filed. It shall indicate that ICE has (i) received this Order; and (ii) received written legal advice from the United States Attorney's Office on the subject of ICE's obligation to comply with this Order. Each declaration shall be filed on the public docket of the Court on or before 1:00pm on March 23. The first declaration must be executed by either the leader of the Civil Division of the United States Attorney's Office or by the Chief of the Civil Division. The second declaration must be executed by either the Newark ICE Field Office Director or by the Newark ICE Field Office Deputy Director. The declarations may be signed by hand or electronically. Finally, the United States Attorney's Office shall immediately file a letter on the Court's public docket if an Order of the Court is violated in connection with this case. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 3/21/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 03/21/2026)

#3

Mar 21, 2026

DECLARATION Civil Chief by All Defendants. (BASIAK, JOHN) (Entered: 03/21/2026)

Mar 21, 2026

Judge Michael E. Farbiarz added. (eaj)

Mar 21, 2026

Add and Terminate Judges

Mar 21, 2026

Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order

#4

Mar 23, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by ALICIA NICOLE GONZALEZ on behalf of PAMELA BONDI, MARKWAYNE MULLIN, LUIS SOTO, JOHN TSOUKARIS (GONZALEZ, ALICIA) (Entered: 03/23/2026)

#5

Mar 23, 2026

DECLARATION of Deputy Field Office Director re 2 Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order,,,,,,,, by PAMELA BONDI, MARKWAYNE MULLIN, LUIS SOTO, JOHN TSOUKARIS. (GONZALEZ, ALICIA) (Entered: 03/23/2026)

#6

Mar 24, 2026

Response to Habeas Petition

#7

Mar 25, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Petitioner shall file a response to the letter brief at ECF 6 on or before April 1 at 5:00pm. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 3/25/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 03/25/2026)

Mar 25, 2026

Text Order

#8

Mar 27, 2026

Letter

#9

Apr 01, 2026

Letter

#10

Apr 03, 2026

Reply to Response (NOT Motion)

#11

Apr 06, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Respondents shall file a short letter responding to the Petitioner's letter at ECF 10 on or before April 9 at 5:00pm. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 4/6/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 04/06/2026)

Apr 06, 2026

Text Order

#12

Apr 09, 2026

Letter

#13

Apr 29, 2026

TEXT ORDER: On or before May 1 at 10:00am, the Petitioner and the Respondents shall each file a brief letter explaining the timing and mechanism of the Petitioner's "release or parole[]," ECF 6 at 2, accompanied by any documentation necessary to support the statutory or regulatory authority for that release. The parties will also provide further context for the "supervision appointment," ECF 1 2, the Petitioner was detained yet, and explain whether this appointment was a condition of Petitioner's release in 2021, following determination of his inadmissibility. See ECF [ 6-3]. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 4/29/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 04/29/2026)

Apr 29, 2026

Text Order

#14

May 01, 2026

Letter

#15

May 01, 2026

Letter

#16

May 03, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Petitioner has requested an extension of time to respond to the text order at ECF 13 . See ECF 15 . The requested is granted. The Petitioner shall file a brief letter on or before May 4 at 10:00am.. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 5/3/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 05/03/2026)

May 03, 2026

Text Order

#17

May 04, 2026

Letter

#18

May 22, 2026

Letter

#19

May 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In its filing at ECF 12, the Respondents have argued that this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the Petitioner's claims under the Administrative Procedure Act and United States Constitution, which stem from the Petitioner's re-detention several years after his release on parole in 2021. The Respondents first argue that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(A)(i) strips this Court of jurisdiction to "entertain any... cause or claim arising from or relating to the implementation or operation of an order of removal pursuant to section 1225(b)(1)." See ECF 12 at 1. The Respondents also asserts that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9) strips this court of jurisdiction because the Petitioner has been issued a final order of removal --- and that once "there is an administratively final removal order, [a] Petitioner's detention claims are... inextricably linked" to that order. See id. at 2 (citing Khalil v. President, United States, 164 F.4th 259 (3d Cir. 2026)). But this is the extent of the Respondents' analysis. They have offered no analysis of the statutory text, nor have they mustered any meaningful arguments from case law. And while the Court has an independent obligation to assure itself of jurisdiction, the arguments before it are too little to go on. The Respondents shall file a more fulsome brief developing its arguments for lack of jurisdiction on or before May 29 at 5:00pm. The Court is particularly interested in the Respondents views on how the claims before the Court are "inextricably linked" to the Petitioner's final order of removal --- how is the Court to know, for example, whether this issue will or will not be adjudicated later before the BIA and ultimately the PFR court? The Court is also interested in the parties' views on whether the applicability of Section 1252(a)(2)'s jurisdiction strip depends upon whether the Court concludes that the Petitioner is being lawfully detained under Section 1225(b)(1), as the Respondents assert. See ECF 6 . The Petitioner shall file a response to the Respondents' filing on or before June 2 at 10:00am. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 5/26/2026. (ps) (Entered: 05/26/2026)

#20

May 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The letter at ECF 18 is generic. It does not contain information that is particular to the Petitioner. If the Petitioner wishes to provide the Court with information specific to himself, he may do so. But as things stand there is no basis for relief. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 5/26/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 05/26/2026)

May 26, 2026

Text Order

#21

May 29, 2026

Letter

#22

Jun 02, 2026

Letter

#23

Jul 01, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Respondents have asserted that the Petitioner became subject to a final order of removal after an immigration judge affirmed the negative credible fear determination issued against him. See ECF 12 at 2. The Respondents shall substantiate the existence of this administratively final order, and provide the Court with corresponding information as to when and by whom it was issued, on or before July 2 at 5:00pm. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/1/2026. (wh) (Entered: 07/01/2026)

#24

Jul 01, 2026

Letter

Jul 01, 2026

Text Order

#25

Jul 16, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In its recent Text Order at ECF 23, the Court directed the Respondents to "substantiate the existence" of an administratively final order of removal as to the Petitioner. In response, the Respondents filed a letter directing the Court to the Exhibit at ECF [8-1], which is an order from an immigration judge issued on 03/26/2026 affirms DHS's prior credible fear determination and "return[s]" the case "to DHS for removal of the Applicant." See id. at 3. The relevant records of DHS's negative credible fear findings, in turn, are found in the Exhibits to ECF 6 . The first relevant exhibit is a Form I-869 "Record of Negative Credible Fear Finding and Request for Review by Immigration Judge." See ECF [6-2] at 1. This form indicates that USCIS "determined that [the Petitioner] do[es] not have a credible fear of persecution or torture," id. at 2, and states that he was "[t]herefore,... ordered removed from the United States." Id. at 3. The second relevant exhibit is a Form I-863 "Notice of Referral to Immigration Judge." ECF [6-2] at 4. This form tells the immigration judge that the relevant "alien has been found inadmissible to the United States and ordered removed." Id. It also says that "[a] copy of the removal order is attached," and indicates that one of the attachments "presented to the immigration judge" is a Form I-860. See id. at 6. The third and final exhibit attached by the Respondents is a Form I-860 --- which is a "Notice and Order of Expedited Removal." ECF [6-3] at 2. But this form is from 2021 --- several years before DHS issued its negative credible fear determination. See id. And it also leaves blank the section entitled "Order of Removal." See id. 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(B)(iii) certainly contemplates issuance of a final order of removal following a negative credible fear determination. See id. § 1225(b)(1)(B)(iii)(I) ("[I]f the officer determines that an alien does not have a credible fear of persecution, the officer shall order the alien removed."). But it does not suggest that the negative credible fear determination itself constitutes such an order. See id. (directing that the officer shall order the alien removed," ostensibly after the negative credible fear determination is issued) (emphasis added). On or before July 20 at noon, the Respondents shall file a copy of the final order of removal issued against the Petitioner, following DHS's negative credible fear determination in March 2026. If one cannot be produced, the Respondents shall file a brief letter with legal authority supporting the proposition inherent in their briefing thus far: that the Form I-869 itself --- the "Record of Negative Credible Fear Finding and Request for Review by Immigration Judge" --- is itself a legally valid, administratively final order of removal. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/16/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/16/2026)

Jul 16, 2026

Text Order

#26

Jul 20, 2026

Letter

#27

Jul 20, 2026

Letter

#28

Jul 20, 2026

TEXT ORDER: This text order covers four points. First, the Respondents indicated on April 9 that the "Petitioner is subject to a final order of expedited removal." ECF 12 at 2. Thereafter, the Court ordered the Respondents to "substantiate the existence of this administratively final order," ECF 23, and to "file a copy of the final order of removal issued against the Petitioner." ECF 25. The Respondents have now filed an order of removal listing today's date. See ECF [26-1]. This gives the undersigned real pause. The Assistant United States Attorney handling this matter shall more fully explain how the statement made on April 9 can be squared with the production of a final order of removal dated July 20. She shall do so via a letter to be filed on or before July 22 at 5:00pm. Second, the Respondents on July 16 were ordered to file "a brief letter with legal authority supporting the proposition... that the Form I-869 itself --- the 'Record of Negative Credible Fear Finding and Request for Review by Immigration Judge' --- is itself a legally valid, administratively final order of removal." ECF 25. The filing that responds to this, at ECF 26, simply does not address the Court's direction to provide legal authority. The Court takes this as a concession, for the purposes of this case, that the previously made credible-fear finding did not itself amount to a final order of removal. Therefore, there is no impediment to the Court's exercise of its jurisdiction in this case. Jurisdiction attached here long ago --- and certainly well before the July 20 purported order of removal. Third, the Petitioner appears to be detained under Section 1226(a). If so, he is entitled to an immigration-court bond hearing. That bond hearing shall go forward on or before noon on July 22, unless the Respondents file a letter on or before July 21 at 2:30pm (i) explaining that the Petitioner has asked to adjourn the bond hearing or (ii) explaining that the Petitioner is, in the Respondents' judgment, detained under Section 1226(c) and why that is so. Fourth, the Respondents shall file a status update on or before 5:00pm on July 23.. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/20/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

Jul 20, 2026

Text Order

#29

Jul 21, 2026

Letter

#30

Jul 21, 2026

Letter

#31

Jul 21, 2026

Letter

#32

Jul 22, 2026

Letter

#33

Jul 22, 2026

Letter

#34

Jul 22, 2026

Letter

#35

Jul 23, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Respondents shall file a status update letter on or before July 24 at 5:00pm.. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/23/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

#36

Jul 23, 2026

Order

Jul 23, 2026

Text Order

#37

Jul 24, 2026

Letter

#38

Jul 26, 2026

TEXT ORDER: A petition was filed, see ECF 1, a bond hearing was ordered, see ECF 28, and it was conducted. See ECF 37 . Accordingly, the Court has adjudicated the Petitioner's statutory claim. See Verified Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (ECF 1) 58-60. If the Petitioner seeks any additional relief based on his constitutional claims, see id. 61-72, he shall file a short letter on or before July 31 at 5:00pm. If no letter is filed before the deadline, the petition will be promptly dismissed. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/26/2026. (ps) (Entered: 07/26/2026)

Jul 26, 2026

Text Order

#39

Jul 31, 2026

Letter

Aug 04, 2026

Text Order

#41

Aug 07, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#42

Aug 07, 2026

Response (NOT Motion)

Aug 07, 2026

Text Order