Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
MIGUEL RAMOS QUINONES,
Petitioner,
v. No. 2:26-cv-0917-KG-GJF
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General of the United States;
SECRETARY, U.S. Department of Homeland Security;
MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA, El Paso Field Office Director,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
TODD LYONS, Acting Director of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement; and
WARDEN, Otero County Processing Center,
Respondents.1
ORDER TO ANSWER AND ENJOINING TRANSFER OUT OF DISTRICT
Before the Court is Petitioner’s pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) (Petition). Petitioner is detained at the Otero County Processing Center
in Chaparral, New Mexico and has paid the filing fee. Construed liberally, Petitioner contends
he did not receive a constitutionally adequate bond hearing before an Immigration Judge.
(Doc. 1) at 1-2. He seeks immediate release or a new custody hearing consistent with due
process. Id. at 2. Petitioner also filed a Motion to Stay Transfer Pending Resolution of
Petition. (Doc. 2).
1 The Court adds/substitutes the above-mentioned parties as Respondents in this case. See
Lowmaster v. Dir., Bureau of Prisons, 2024 WL 5135970, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 17, 2024) (“the
Court notes that it routinely substitutes the” proper parties as “respondent in habeas cases”);
Danderson v. Page, 2024 WL 3913051, at *2 (E.D. Okla. Aug. 20, 2024) (substituting the proper
party respondent in a habeas case).
Case 2:26-cv-00917-KG-GJF Document 5 Filed 03/27/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Having conducted an initial review of the Petition, the Court finds the Petition is not
subject to summary dismissal. Petitioner alleges he has not been provided a constitutionally
adequate bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, and it does not appear that he is being detained
pursuant to a final order of removal. See Garcia Sanchez v. Noem, et al., 25-cv-1219 KG/JFR
(concluding petitioner was detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226, rather than 8 U.S.C. § 1225,
and ordering Respondents to provide a bond hearing); Pu Sacvin v. De Anda-Ybarra, 2025 WL
3187432, at *3 (D.N.M.) (Gonzales, J.) (same); Danierov v. Noem, 2026 WL 45288, at *2
(D.N.M.) (Gonzales, J.) (same). The Clerk’s Office has electronically served Respondents by
Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and Electronic Case Filing
(CM/ECF) system. (Doc. 3). The United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) shall answer the
Petition (Doc. 1) within ten (10) business days of entry of this Order and show cause why the
requested relief should not be granted. See Habeas Rules 1(b), 4 (courts have discretion to set a
time for respondents to answer a habeas petition). Petitioner may file an optional reply within
seven (7) business days after the answer brief is filed. If the USAO declines to timely respond,
the Court may enter a separate order directing the Immigration Court to conduct a bond hearing
in accordance with its prior rulings on this issue.
The Court grants the Motion to Stay Transfer Pending Resolution of Petition (Doc. 2) and
enjoins the Government from transferring Petitioner from the District of New Mexico while this
case remains pending.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. The USAO must answer the Petition (Doc. 1) within ten (10) business days of entry of
this Order and show cause why the requested relief should not be granted;
Case 2:26-cv-00917-KG-GJF Document 5 Filed 03/27/26 Page 2 of 3

3
2. If Petitioner wishes to file an optional reply, he must do so within seven (7) business days
after the response is filed;
3. The Motion to Stay Transfer Pending Resolution of Petition (Doc. 2) is granted and the
Government is enjoined from transferring Petitioner from the District of New Mexico
while these proceedings remain pending, absent express written authorization from this
Court; and
4. The Clerk’s Office shall add the additional party Respondents set forth in the caption of
this Order to the docket of this case.
/s/Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
• Please note that this document has been
electronically filed. To verify its
authenticity, please refer to the Digital File
Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic
Filing) accompanying this document.
Electronically filed documents can be found
on the Court’s PACER public access
system.
Case 2:26-cv-00917-KG-GJF Document 5 Filed 03/27/26 Page 3 of 3