District of Massachusetts • 1:26-cv-14665

#1

Oct 14, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number AMADC-12110911 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Rodolfo Castillo Soto. (Attachments: # 1 Category Form, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(VanScoyoc, Ellen) (Entered: 10/14/2026)

#2

Oct 14, 2026

District Judge Julia E. Kobick: ORDER entered. EMERGENCY ORDER CONCERNING STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL. (MC) (Entered: 10/14/2026)

#3

Oct 15, 2026

ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin 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 Paul G. Levenson. (JAM) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

#4

Oct 15, 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). (FGD) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

#5

Oct 15, 2026

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. ORDER CONCERNING SERVICE OF PETITION AND STAY OF TRANSFER OR REMOVAL. (FGD) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

#6

Oct 15, 2026

Copy re 5 Service Order - 2241 Petition, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) emailed to Duty AUSA and mailed to Respondents and USAO on 10/15/2026. (FGD) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

#7

Oct 15, 2026

NOTICE of Appearance by Benjamin Tolkoff on behalf of Todd Blanche, Antone Moniz, Markwayne Mullin, David Venturella, David Wesling (Tolkoff, Benjamin) (Entered: 10/15/2026)

Oct 15, 2026

Notice of Case Assignment

Oct 15, 2026

Copy Mailed

#8

Oct 19, 2026

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

#9

Oct 20, 2026

District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. The Court has reviewed the petition and the answer, in which the respondents acknowledge that “the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those recently decided by the First Circuit in Guerrero-Orellana,” and that, should the Court “follow the holding” of that binding precedent, it would conclude that Petitioner is detained under 8 U.S.C. 1226(a) and is therefore eligible for a bond hearing. Doc. No. 8. The Court so concludes. Respondents’ concession was made on behalf of all respondents in this case and, therefore, is binding on ICE and the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice. In light of the foregoing, the Court construes—and ORDERS the respondents to likewise construe—the pending petition as conveying a request for a bond hearing before an immigration judge. The Court further ORDERS that such a hearing shall be scheduled (if it has not already been scheduled) to occur by Tuesday, October 27, 2026; that the legal standard governing such hearing is as established by the First Circuit in Hernandez-Lara v. Lyons; that, in assessing whether the government has met its burden of proof as to flight or danger, the immigration judge shall consider whether any condition, combination of conditions, or less-restrictive alternative to detention would ameliorate such risk(s); and that the respondents shall not retaliate against Petitioner for the filing of this action. The parties shall file a joint status report by Monday, November 2, 2026, notifying the Court of whether a bond hearing has occurred and, if so, its outcome, and shall include a copy of any written order of the immigration judge. The merits of the habeas petition remain under advisement pending receipt and review of that status report.(SED) (Entered: 10/20/2026)

Oct 20, 2026

Order AND ~Util - Set Deadlines

#10

Nov 02, 2026

Status Report

#12

Nov 03, 2026

Order Dismissing Case

Nov 03, 2026

Order