Western District of Texas • 5:26-cv-03088

#1

May 11, 2026

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ( Filing fee $ 5 receipt number ATXWDC-21925770), filed by Adolfo Goytia-Olivares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Aguilar, Amanda) (Entered: 05/11/2026)

May 11, 2026

If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Farrer (ab5)

May 11, 2026

Case assigned to Judge Fred Biery. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (ab5)

#2

May 12, 2026

ORDER FOR SERVICE AND FURTHER ORDERS OF THE COURT--IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that notice of electronic filing of the Petition (ECF No. 1) and thisOrder to the United States Attorney in San Antonio, Texas, shall constitute service on the Federal Respondents, as required by the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure5, and on all Respondents unless otherwise contested. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents shall file a response to the Petition within seven (7) days of the date of service.. Signed by Judge Fred Biery. (vl) (Entered: 05/12/2026)

May 12, 2026

To be Referred to SA Mag Judge

May 12, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

#3

May 19, 2026

Response

#4

May 21, 2026

Order Reassigning Case

#5

Jun 17, 2026

Appear Pro Hac Vice

#6

Jun 18, 2026

Text Order REFERRING 5 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice to Magistrate Judge Richard B. Farrer for disposition. Entered by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (rw) (Entered: 06/18/2026)

Jun 18, 2026

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

#7

Jul 09, 2026

Order

Jul 09, 2026

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

#8

Jul 13, 2026

Order

#9

Oct 14, 2026

Text Order Requiring Supplemental Briefing re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner must submit supplemental briefing within seven days of the date of this Order to include information on Petitioner's alleged date of entry. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (rw) (Entered: 10/14/2026)

Oct 14, 2026

Order

#10

Oct 21, 2026

SUPPLEMENT TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS by Adolfo Goytia-Olivares. (Aguilar, Amanda) (Entered: 10/21/2026)

#11

Oct 22, 2026

TEXT ORDER GRANTING 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS. Petitioner claims that Respondents have violated procedural due process rights under the Fifth Amendment based on a significant presence in the United States. Respondents have submitted a response in opposition. After reviewing the briefing, provided evidence, and applicable law, the Court grants the petition based on the law as set out and analyzed in Longoria Mendoza v. Noem, 823 F. Supp. 3d 636 (W.D. Tex. 2026) and numerous other cases decided by the undersigned. While there are differences between this case and Longoria Mendoza, none warrant a different result. The Court notes the en banc Fifth Circuit has stayed the district-court judgments pending rehearing in Sosnava Rodriguez v. Ortega, 183 F.4th 387, 388 (5th Cir. 2026) (per curiam). To the extent the Government might contend that this stay prevents district courts from granting habeas relief on procedural-due-process grounds while rehearing is pending, this Court does not read the order so broadly. The Court is unaware of any Fifth Circuit decision or order holding that the stay categorically bars adjudication of, or relief on, such claims. Other courts have continued to consider due-process claims under pre-panel-decision analyses, including Perozo-Mata v. Blanche, No. 4:26-CV-05679, 2026 WL 2195373, at *3 (S.D. Tex. July 27, 2026).For reasons previously stated in Longoria Mendoza, the Court finds that (1) it has jurisdiction to consider the arguments presented in the instant habeas petition; (2) any asserted failure to exhaust administrative remedies is excused; (3) Respondents have violated Petitioner's procedural due process rights; and (4) fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412 are not available in habeas corpus proceedings like this one. The Court treats the instant action solely as a habeas action under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and declines to consider any claim other than the alleged violation of procedural due process. The Court has considered the arguments Respondents make in response and rejects them for reasons stated in prior cases.Under the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court concludes Petitioner's detention is unlawful, and habeas relief is proper. Because Petitioner has no known criminal history, has established a significant presence in the United States that requires due process protection, and there is no indication of flight risk or danger to the community, it is ORDERED that on or before October 24, 2026, Respondents shall RELEASE Petitioner Adolfo Goytia-Olivares from custody to a public location, under appropriate conditions of release. Respondents must NOTIFY Petitioner's counsel of the exact location and exact time of release as soon as practicable and no less than two hours before release. Any possible or anticipated removal or transfer of Petitioner under this present detention is PROHIBITED. No later than the next business day after the ordered release date, Respondents shall FILE a status report to confirm whether Petitioner has been released. If counsel for Petitioner disagrees with any aspect of the filed Status Report, counsel may file a separate Status Report. A written final judgment will be issued separately to summarize the orders of the Court and to close this habeas case. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (rw) (Entered: 10/22/2026)

#12

Oct 22, 2026

FINAL JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Jason K. Pulliam. (cih) (Entered: 10/22/2026)

Oct 22, 2026

Order

#13

Oct 26, 2026

Status Report