District of New Jersey • 2:26-cv-08669

#1

Jul 14, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $5 NEW54557), filed by RICHARD ARGENIS ACOSTA TOLENTINO. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Envelope)(mk) Modified on 7/15/2026 (ps). (Entered: 07/14/2026)

#2

Jul 14, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Petitioner shall not be removed from the state of New Jersey or from the United States. This is an administrative stay, the purpose of which is to briefly freeze the status quo and preserve the Court's jurisdiction should it exist. See Zheng v. Bondi, 2025 WL 280542, at *1 (D.N.J. Sept. 26, 2025). The Court has received the petition at ECF 1 . This is the fourth petition filed before the undersigned. See Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Acosta Tolentino v. Soto, No. 2:26-cv-05051-MEF (D.N.J. May 5, 2026) (ECF 1); Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Tolentino v. Warden, No. 2:26-cv-07017-MEF (D.N.J. June 12, 2026) (ECF 1); Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Acosta Tolentino v. Warden, No. 2:26-cv-08055-MEF (D.N.J. July 1, 2026) (ECF 1). The petition dismissed yesterday appears to have raised some of the same issues as the petition at ECF 1 . See Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 40, 62, Acosta Tolentino v. Warden, No. 2:26-cv-08055-MEF (D.N.J. July 1, 2026) (ECF 1). That raises the possibility that this petition is barred under the abuse of the writ doctrine. See generally McClesky v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467 (1991). The Petitioner shall file a letter on or before June 20 at noon explaining why this case is not barred by that doctrine. Because there are exceptions to that doctrine, see Wise v. Fulcomer, 958 F.2d 30, 34 (3d Cir. 1992), as well as other considerations that may counsel against application of such a bar, cf. Stewart v. Martinez-Villareal, 523 U.S. 637, 643 (1998), the Respondents shall also file an answer addressing the Petitioner's arguments on or before June 20 at noon. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/14/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/14/2026)

Jul 14, 2026

Emergent Immigration Habeas Non-transfer Order

#3

Jul 15, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Court's text order yesterday listed June 20 as the deadline for Petitioner and the Respondents to make their respective filings. See ECF 2. That was a typographical error. The deadline for the parties is July 20. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/15/2026. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/15/2026)

Jul 15, 2026

Text Order

#4

Jul 20, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by MARGARET ANN MAHONEY on behalf of TODD BLANCHE, FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, MARKWAYNE MULLIN, UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, WARDEN (MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#5

Jul 20, 2026

RESPONSE to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by TODD BLANCHE, FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR, MARKWAYNE MULLIN, UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, WARDEN. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - I 213, # 2 Exhibit B - NTA)(MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#6

Jul 20, 2026

PETITIONER'S REPLY from RICHARD ARGENIS ACOSTA TOLENTINO. (lag, ) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#7

Jul 22, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Respondents argue that "[the] Petitioner is in ICE detention without bond pursuant to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's interpretation of 'applicants for admission' under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)." Respondents' July 20, 2026 Letter (ECF 5) at 2. The undersigned already rejected this argument, held that the Petitioner could only be lawfully detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), and ordered an immigration court bond hearing. See Text Order, Acosta Tolentino v. Soto, No. 26-5051 (D.N.J. May 5, 2026) (ECF 2). Because a bond hearing went forward, see Respondents' Letter, Acosta Tolentino v. Soto, No. 26-5051 (D.N.J. May 12, 2026) (ECF 9), it appears that any illegality associated with the Respondent's decision to detain the Petitioner under § 1225(b)(2) has been resolved. See Kumar v. Soto, 822 F. Supp. 3d 450, 465 n.32 (D.N.J. 2026). Unlike the Petitioner's prior requests for relief, this petition primarily argues that the Petitioner cannot be lawfully detained because of his pending U Visa application. The Respondents shall file a letter brief that addresses (i) the status of the Petitioner's U Visa application and (ii) whether, in light of that status, the Petitioner is entitled to habeas relief on or before July 29 at 5:00pm. (This response need not address the impact of the Petitioner's asserted membership in the class certified in Immigration Center for Women and Children v. Noem, 2026 WL 1455004 (C.D. Cal. May 20, 2026)). So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 7/22/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

Jul 22, 2026

Text Order

#8

Jul 29, 2026

Letter from Respondents respectfully providing the Court with response to ECF No 7 re 7 Text Order,,,,,,. (MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 07/29/2026)

#9

Aug 04, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The Court previously ordered the Respondents to address "(i) the status of the Petitioner's U visa application and (ii) whether, in light of that status, the Petitioner is entitled to habeas relief." ECF 7. The Respondents were further instructed not to address the Petitioner's asserted membership in the class certified in Immigration Center for Women and Children v. Noem, 2026 WL 1455004 (C.D. Cal. May 20, 2026). See id. But the submission at ECF 8 focuses almost exclusively on the class certification issue. The Respondents shall file a responsive letter brief on or before August 5 at noon. It shall address two points. First, whether the detention of individuals in the process of applying for U Visas is consistent with due process. See, e.g., Gonzalez v. Wesling, 2026 WL 1765871, at *4-8 (D.R.I. June 19, 2026). Second, whether ICE Policy No. 11005.4, as applied to individuals with pending U Visa applications, is arbitrary and capricious. See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A); Immigr. Ctr. for Women & Child. v. Noem, 2026 WL 1455004, at *34-36 (C.D. Cal. May 20, 2026). So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 8/4/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#10

Aug 04, 2026

Letter from Respondents respectfully requesting additional time to respond re 9 Text Order,,,,. (MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

Aug 04, 2026

Text Order

#11

Aug 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER: The request for an extension at ECF 10 is granted in light of the extraordinary docket congestion the United States Attorney's Office is working under. The Respondents shall file a short letter on or before August 5 at 3:00pm indicating whether the Petitioner has a criminal record or there is otherwise a solid basis for believing that he is a danger to the community. If the Court is not persuaded that one of these boxes is properly checked, it will promptly order release on bail in light of the very long extension request at ECF 10 and the fact that the prior round of briefing was not adequately responsive to the Court's order. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 8/5/2026. (ps) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#12

Aug 05, 2026

Letter from Respondents respecting providing the court with information regarding Petitioner's criminal history re 11 Text Order,,. (MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

#13

Aug 05, 2026

TEXT ORDER: In light of the submission at ECF 12, the Petitioner shall be released from immigration custody on bail, by noon on August 6. Should the Respondents seek to impose any bail conditions, they must apply to the Court before 10:00am on August 6. If, after August 6, the Respondents seek to reinstate bail, they may apply to the Court. So Ordered by Judge Michael E. Farbiarz on 8/5/26. (ro, ) (Entered: 08/05/2026)

Aug 05, 2026

Text Order

#14

Aug 07, 2026

Letter from Respondents respectfully providing the court with a release update re 13 Text Order,. (MAHONEY, MARGARET) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#15

Aug 20, 2026

Mail Returned as Undeliverable as to 9 . Mail sent to RICHARD ARGENIS ACOSTA TOLENTINO. (sks) (Entered: 08/21/2026)

#16

Aug 27, 2026

Mail Returned as Undeliverable as to 1 . Mail sent to RICHARD ARGENIS ACOSTA TOLENTINO. (sks) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

Sep 02, 2026

Text Order

Sep 10, 2026

Terminate Civil Case