Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
RAMILABEN D. PATEL,
A240 340 702,
Petitioner,
v.
DAVID O’NEILL, Acting Field
Office Director of Enforcement and
Removal Operations, Philadelphia
Field Office, Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, et al.,
Respondents.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-cv-02181
(SAPORITO, J.)
ORDER
Now before the court is a report and recommendation by United
States Magistrate Judge Sean A. Camoni, in which he recommends that
the petitioner’s § 2241 habeas petition (Doc. 1) be granted. Doc. 11. In
support of this recommendation, Judge Camoni finds that this court may
properly exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the instant habeas
petition, that exhaustion of administrative remedies by the petitioner
should be excused as futile, and that the petitioner’s continued and
indefinite detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) is unlawful as she may
only be properly detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), in which case she is
Case 3:25-cv-02181-JFS Document 17 Filed 03/10/26 Page 1 of 4

- 2 -
entitled to an individualized bond hearing.
See id.
The 	respondent 	has 	conceded 	with 	respect 	to 	the 	issues 	of
jurisdiction,
see Doc. 14, and administrative exhaustion,
see Doc. 15, at
1 n.1; Doc. 16, at 1 n.1. But she has filed objections to Judge Camoni’s
report 	and 	recommendation, 	contesting 	Judge 	Camoni’s 	statutory
analysis on the merits of the petition. Doc. 15; Doc. 16. We have conducted
a de novo review of the contested portions of the report, but we find the
respondent’s objections to be unpersuasive and without merit.
See Hayat
v. O’Neill, No. 3:25-cv-02416, 2026 WL 561200, at *6–7 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 27,
2026);
Diaz Aparicio v. Lowe, No. 3:25-cv-02413, 2026 WL 526702, at *6–
8 (M.D. Pa. Feb. 25, 2026).
See generally 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1);
United
States v. McLaughlin, 607 F. Supp. 3d 522, 529 (M.D. Pa. 2022).
Following an independent review of the report and the record, and
having afforded “reasoned consideration” to uncontested portions of the
report,
E.E.O.C. v. City of Long Branch, 866 F.3d 93, 99 (3d Cir. 2017), we
are satisfied “that there is no clear error on the face of the record,” Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee note to 1983 amendment. We find
Judge Camoni’s analysis to be well-reasoned and well-supported by the
record and applicable law, and we find the respondent’s specific objections
Case 3:25-cv-02181-JFS Document 17 Filed 03/10/26 Page 2 of 4

- 3 -
to be without merit. With respect to the parties’ arguments on the merits,
the court will adopt the report and recommendation as the decision of the
court, but we decline to adopt it with respect to the recommended remedy.
Instead, we find that § 1226(a), not § 1225(b)(1)(A), applies to the
detention of Patel. We find that she is no longer seeking admission into
the United States—at the time of her arrest and detention, she was not
actively attempting to come into the United States at a border or port of
entry. Rather, she is already here, having resided within the United
States for an extended period of time—nearly two-and-a-half years at the
time of her arrest and detention.
See Hayat, 2026 WL 561200, at *7;
Diaz
Aparicio, 2026 WL 526702, at *8. Thus, Patel may only be properly
detained pursuant to § 1226(a), and therefore she is entitled to a bond
hearing, rather than an order directing her release outright.
See Hayat,
2026 WL 561200, at *7;
Diaz Aparicio, 2026 WL 526702, at *8.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. 	The report and recommendation of Judge Camoni (Doc. 11) is
ADOPTED in part and NOT ADOPTED in part;
2. 	The petition (Doc. 1) is GRANTED;
2. 	The 	government 	shall 	either 	provide 	Patel 	with 	an
Case 3:25-cv-02181-JFS Document 17 Filed 03/10/26 Page 3 of 4

- 4 -
individualized bond hearing within twenty-one (21) days after entry of
this order or release Patel on her own recognizance, pursuant to 8 U.S.C.
§ 1226(a);
3. 	At this individualized bond hearing, the government shall
bear the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the
petitioner’s continued detention is necessary to prevent her from fleeing
or harming the community;
4. 	The parties shall file a written notice of the outcome of this
individualized bond determination by an immigration judge within seven
(7) days after the date of the hearing; and
5. 	The clerk is directed to mark this case as CLOSED.
Dated: March 10, 2026
	s/Joseph F. Saporito, Jr.
JOSEPH F. SAPORITO, JR.
United States District Judge
Case 3:25-cv-02181-JFS Document 17 Filed 03/10/26 Page 4 of 4