Esquivel-Bicalho Junior v. Wesling et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
DANIEL PABLO ESQUIVEL-BICALHO
JUNIOR,
Petitioner,
*
*
*
*
*
Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-13866-IT
v. 	*
*
DAVID WESLING, Acting New England
Field Office Director; TODD LYONS, Acting
Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; KRISTI NOEM, U.S. Secretary
of Homeland Security,
Respondents.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
December 23, 2025
TALWANI, D.J.
In his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 1], Petitioner Daniel Pablo Esquivel-
Bicalho Junior states that he is a Brazilian national residing in Massachusetts. Id. ¶ 1. In or
around September 2021, Petitioner entered the United States. Id. Petitioner subsequently asserted
a fear of return to Brazil and was removed from expedited removal proceedings and processed
for a credible fear interview. Id. That same month, Petitioner was subsequently released from
detention and paroled into the country. Id.
Petitioner states further that on December 16, 2025, federal immigration officials arrested
him during a check-in with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). Id. ¶¶ 2, 5.
Petitioner alleges he is currently being held in ICE custody in the District of Massachusetts.
Id. ¶ 3.
Case 1:25-cv-13866-IT Document 11 Filed 12/23/25 Page 1 of 3

2
Petitioner contends that “[a]s a person detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), Petitioner
must, upon his request, receive a custody redetermination hearing (colloquially called a ‘bond
hearing’) with strong procedural protections.” Id. ¶ 12. Petitioner accordingly requests such a
bond hearing. Id. ¶ 13.
Respondents state that
the legal issues presented in this Petition are similar to those most recently
addressed by this Court in Cabello v. Moniz, et al., No. 25-13213-IT, 2025 WL
3295996, at ** 3-4 (D. Mass. Nov. 26, 2025) (petitioner initially processed under
8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1) as mandatory detainee and paroled into United States under
8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5)(A), entitled to bond hearing under Section 1226 considering
facts in case), as well as Doe v. Moniz, Civil Action No. 25-cv-12094-IT, 2025 WL
2576819 (D. Mass. Sept. 5, 2025), [Elias] Escobar v. Hyde, Civil Action No. 25-
cv-12620-IT, 2025 WL 2823324 (D. Mass. Oct. 3, 2025), and Maza v. Hyde, Civil
Action No. 25-cv-12407-IT, -- F. Supp. 3d --, 2025 WL 2951922 (D. Mass. Oct.
20, 2025).
Resp. 1–2 [Doc. No. 9]. While Respondents note their disagreement with these decisions, they
also concede that “should the Court follow its reasoning in Cabello, Doe, [Elias] Escobar, and
Maza, supra, it would likely reach the same result here.” Id. at 2.
Nothing in the record indicates that Petitioner was detained on December 16, 2025, under
8 U.S.C. § 1225 rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1226. The court finds the reasoning in Doe and Elias
Escobar remains correct. The Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision in Matter of Yajure
Hurtado, 29 I&N Dec. 216 (BIA 2025), is unpersuasive and does not change the analysis. See
Elias Escobar, 2025 WL 2823324, at *3 (citing cases reaching the same conclusion).
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus [Doc. No. 1] is therefore GRANTED as follows:
No later than December 31, 2025, Petitioner must be provided a bond hearing pursuant to 8
U.S.C. § 1226 or, if the immigration judge declines to conduct a bond hearing based on Matter of
Yajure Hurtado, Respondents shall so advise the court by that date so that this court may conduct
the bond hearing. Any decision by the immigration judge to retain Petitioner in custody
Case 1:25-cv-13866-IT Document 11 Filed 12/23/25 Page 2 of 3

3
following a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226 shall set forth the reasons for the continued
detention.
Respondents shall submit a status report on this matter no later than January 5, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 23, 2025 	/s/ Indira Talwani
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-13866-IT Document 11 Filed 12/23/25 Page 3 of 3