District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-13950

#1

Aug 27, 2026

Emergency PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-11989909 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Willian P Encalada Sapatanga. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Exhibit Request for Reasonable Fear Interview)(Shaw, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#2

Aug 27, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Allison D. Burroughs 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 Jessica D. Hedges. (JKK) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

#3

Aug 27, 2026

Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered. Order Concerning Service of Petition and Stay of Transfer or Removal. The answer or responsive pleading is due no later than September 10, 2026.(CAM) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

Aug 27, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

#4

Aug 28, 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). (CAM) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

#5

Aug 28, 2026

Copy re 3 Service Order - 2241 Petition, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), emailed to Duty AUSA Ross and mailed to Respondents on 8/27/2026. (CAM) (Entered: 08/28/2026)

Aug 28, 2026

Copy Mailed

#6

Sep 08, 2026

Notice of Appearance

#7

Sep 10, 2026

Answer/Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus - 2241

#8

Sep 16, 2026

Response - not related to a motion

#9

Oct 28, 2026

Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. Petitioner, a citizen of Ecuador, has filed a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in which he contests the lawfulness of his warrantless arrest and continuing detention by ICE. [ECF No. 1 (“Pet.”)]. Petitioner first entered the United States and was found inadmissible and ordered removed in 2017 or 2018. Compare [ECF No. 7 (“Resp.”) at 4 (stating that Petitioner was charged with illegal entry in 2018 without mentioning 2017)], and [ECF No. 7-1 at 4 (showing August 2018 charge and conviction for illegal entry)], with [Pet. ¶ 15 (“Petitioner first entered the United States in or about 2017.”)], and [id. ¶ 3­ (“ICE may only now be discovering and processing a possible 2017 removal order after Petitioner’s arrest.”)]. Subsequently, Petitioner reentered the United States and, on a date unknown to the Court, took up continuous residence in or around Framingham, Massachusetts. [Id. ¶¶ 4, 16]; see also [Resp. at 4 (stating that Petitioner was again ordered removed in 2021 and that, after the 2021 removal, Petitioner again reentered without inspection)]. On August 26, 2026, in Framingham, Petitioner was stopped and detained by ICE while riding as a passenger in a work van. [Pet. ¶ 18]; see also [Resp. at 6]; [ECF No. 7-1 at 5]. Petitioner was not asked to provide, and did not provide, any form of identification before he was detained. [Pet. ¶ 38]. The next day, on August 27, 2026, Petitioner informed ICE through counsel that he fears return to Ecuador and requested referral for a reasonable-fear interview. [Id. ¶ 25]; [ECF No. 1-3 (email request for reasonable-fear interview)].In his petition, Petitioner argues that ICE arrested and detained him without a warrant on August 26, 2026, in violation of the Fourth Amendment and Due Process Clause and ultra vires of 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2) because ICE lacked probable cause to believe that he was violating any immigration law or likely to escape before a warrant could be obtained. [Pet. ¶¶ 28-45]; 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2); Morales v. Chadbourne, 793 F.3d 208, 216-17 (1st Cir. 2015) (explaining that, under § 1357, “an immigration officer... need[s] probable cause to arrest and detain individuals for the purpose of investigating their immigration status”). Respondents counter generally that the length of Petitioner’s detention is permissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6) and Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), [Resp. at 3-6], and also reference § 1231(a)(5), under which a noncitizen’s prior order of removal may be reinstated based on a finding that the noncitizen has unlawfully reentered the United States, [id. at 3]. 8 U.S.C. § 1231. Respondents do not, however, meaningfully discuss Petitioner’s argument that even if § 1231(a)(5) might be “ultimately applicable after a valid reinstatement” of a prior order of removal, that still would “not answer whether Respondents lawfully effectuated custody on August 26,” [ECF No. 8 at 4]; see generally [Pet.]; see also [ECF No. 8 at 2-7 (arguing that the “only relevant document tendered” by Respondents, a Form I-205 that is dated August 26, 2026, but bears no timestamp, [ECF No. 7-2], leaves open “whether the [I-205] preceded Petitioner’s seizure or whether it rested on a valid and completed reinstatement determination”)]. See generally [Resp.]. Accordingly, recognizing that some courts have ordered petitioners’ release in comparable circumstances, see, e.g., De La Rosa Izaguirre v. Blanche, No. 26-cv-02911, 2026 WL 2023200 (E.D.N.Y. July 13, 2026) (concluding that the relevant Form I-205 “was not validly executed and could not justify Petitioner's arrest and subsequent detention” and ordering petitioner’s release), the Court ORDERS Respondents to submit, by Friday, November 6, 2026, the following information to supplement their response, [Resp.]: (1) copies of the relevant Forms I-205 and I-871; (2) the date, time, and location of the issuance and completion of the Forms I-205 and I-871; (3) a declaration of the arresting officer(s) regarding the circumstances of Petitioner’s arrest; and (4) any other records created in connection with the arrest. In addition, Respondents shall submit, also by Friday, November 6, 2026, a status report concerning the status of Petitioner’s request for a reasonable-fear interview.(CAM) (Entered: 10/28/2026)

Oct 28, 2026

Order

#10

Nov 05, 2026

Response to Court Order