District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-13315

#1

Jul 20, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11900970 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Jose Daniel Pineda Roa. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Category Form)(Roth, Stephen) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#2

Jul 20, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Angel Kelley assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell. (CAM) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#3

Jul 20, 2026

General Order 19-02, dated June 1, 2019 regarding Public Access to Immigration Cases Restricted by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c). (CEH) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#4

Jul 20, 2026

District Judge Angel Kelley: ORDER entered. Standing Order Regarding Motion Practice. (CEH) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#5

Jul 20, 2026

District Judge Angel Kelley: ORDER entered. Order Concerning Service of Petition, Stay of Transfer or Removal, and Required Response.(CEH) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

#6

Jul 20, 2026

Copy re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), 5 Service Order - 2241 Petition emailed to AUSA Alexandra Brazier, Rayford Farquhar, and USAMA Civil Process on 7/20/2026 at 4:34 pm and mailed to All Respondents (CEH) (Entered: 07/20/2026)

Jul 20, 2026

Copy Mailed

Jul 20, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#7

Jul 23, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Benjamin Tolkoff on behalf of Todd W. Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling (Tolkoff, Benjamin) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

#8

Jul 23, 2026

AMENDED COMPLAINT against Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling, Todd W. Blanche, Antone Moniz, filed by Jose Daniel Pineda Roa.(Roth, Stephen) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

#9

Jul 23, 2026

RESPONSE/ANSWER to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) by Todd W. Blanche, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin. (Tolkoff, Benjamin) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

#10

Jul 23, 2026

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Petitioner Jose Daniel Pineda Roa filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on July 20, 2026. [Dkt. 1]. Petitioner filed an Amended Complaint on July 23, 2026. [Dkt. 8]. That same day, Respondents filed an answer to the original Petition [Dkt. 1] and submitted "the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently addressed by this Court in Edgar Fabricio Amaya Sanchez v. Moniz et al., 25-cv-12806-AK, Doc. No. 10 (D. Mass. October 8, 2025)," and "[s]hould the Court follow its reasoning in Amaya Sanchez, it would reach the same result here." [Dkt. 9]. Respondents have not addressed Petitioner's Amended Complaint. The facts presented in the Amended Complaint also appear materially indistinguishable from Amaya Sanchez v. Moniz et al., No. 25-CV-12806-AK (D. Mass. Oct. 10, 2025) [Dkt. 10], in which the Court joined other sessions of this Court, and other courts across the country, in holding that the arrest and detention of noncitizens within the United States is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). On the facts before it, the Court does not find reason to deviate from the analysis presented in Amaya Sanchez.Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Respondents to show cause, no later than three business days from the date of this Order, why the facts of this case differ from those in Amaya Sanchez. Should Respondents claim the facts differ, Petitioner shall have three business days to respond. (CEH) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

Jul 23, 2026

Order

#11

Aug 03, 2026

District Judge Angel Kelley: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Petitioner Jose Daniel Pineda Roa filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on July 20, 2026. [Dkt. 1]. Petitioner filed an Amended Complaint on July 23, 2026. [Dkt. 8]. That same day, Respondents filed an answer to the original Petition [Dkt. 1] and submitted "the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently addressed by this Court in Edgar Fabricio Amaya Sanchez v. Moniz et al., 25-cv-12806-AK, Doc. No. 10 (D. Mass. October 8, 2025)," and "[s]hould the Court follow its reasoning in Amaya Sanchez, it would reach the same result here." [Dkt. 9]. In Amaya Sanchez, the Court joined other sessions of this Court, and other courts across the country, in holding that the arrest and detention of noncitizens within the United States is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). On July 23, 2026, the Court ordered Respondents to show cause, no later than three business days from the date of the Order, why the facts of this case differ from those in Amaya Sanchez. [Dkt. 10]. Respondents have not submitted and, therefore, waived their response to the Amended Petition.On the facts before it, the Court does not find reason to deviate from the analysis presented in Amaya Sanchez. Accordingly, Petitioner is subject to 8 U.S.C. § 1226’s discretionary detention framework and entitled to a bond hearing. He has not received such a hearing, so his detention is unlawful. Petitioner’s Amended Petition [Dkt. 8] is GRANTED. Respondents are ORDERED to provide Petitioner with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within 10 calendar days of this Order, unless Petitioner requests an extension. Respondents are ENJOINED from denying Petitioner bond on the basis that he is detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2). The parties are ORDERED to file a status report within 14 calendar days of this Order stating whether Petitioner has been granted bond, and, if his request for bond was denied, the reasons for that denial.(CEH) (Entered: 08/03/2026)

Aug 03, 2026

Order