Alvarez-Feliz et al v. Gonzalez et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
LUISA ANNETTE ALVAREZ-FELIX in
representation of Joan Alberto
Zorrilla-Lora.
Petitioners
v.
REBECCA GONZÁLEZ RAMOS, Special Agent
in Charge of Homeland Security
Investigations in San Juan, GARRET J.
RIPA is Miami Field Office Director for
U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, overseen Puerto Rico’s
Immigration and Removal Operations, ICE
Office in GSA Guaynabo Detention
Facility; TODD LYONS in his official
capacity, Acting Director for U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement;
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary of Homeland
Security; PAMELA BONDI, United States
Attorney General; W. STEPHEN MULDROW,
US District Attorney for the District
of Puerto Rico; ROBERTO VAQUERO
Director of Field Operations Customs
and Border Protection; all in their
official capacities.
Respondents
CIVIL NO. 26-1041 (RAM)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Pending before the Court is Petitioner Joan Alberto Zorrilla-
Lora’s (“Petitioner” or “Mr. Zorrilla-Lora”) the Emergency Motion
for Temporary Restraining Order (the “Emergency Motion”). (Docket
No. 3). For the reasons outlined below, the Emergency Motion is
GRANTED.
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 1 of 6

Civil No. 26-1041(RAM) 2
I. BACKROUND
On January 23, 2026, Petitioner filed his pending Emergency
Motion. (Docket No. 3). Petitioner seeks to preserve the status
quo pending resolution of his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(the “Petition”) filed the same day. (Docket Nos. 1 and 3).
In his Petition, Mr. Zorrilla-Lora alleges that: (1) he is a
national and citizen of the Dominican Republic; (2) on
approximately October 13, 2021 he entered Puerto Rico without
undergoing proper admission procedures; (3) on August 20, 2022, he
married Luisa Anette Alvarez-Feliz, a United States citizen; (4)
on September 13, 2024, USCIS approved his Petition for Alien
Relative (1-130); (5) on June 12, 2025, United States Citizenship
and Immigration Service (“USCIS”) received his application for
Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver (I-601A) and payment of the
filing fee as evinced by receipt number YSC2590037159; (6) his I-
601A waiver is currently pending adjudication. (Docket No. 1 at 1-
3; 5-6). On January 8, 2026, Petitioner was stopped by Carolina
Municipal Police Officer Bahamundi Requena (“Officer Bahamundi”)
for alleged violations of Municipal Ordinance 17 Series 2022-2023-
03. (Docket No. 1 at 2). Petitioner’s Puerto Rico Driver’s License,
which he provided to Officer Bahamundi, contains a distinctive
purple bar reserved for non-citizens. Id. Officer Bahamundi cited
Petitioner to appear at the Carolina Municipal Police Station on
January 15, 2026. Id. Petitioner was arrested by United States
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 2 of 6

Civil No. 26-1041(RAM) 3
Border Patrol agents (“BP Agents”) at the Carolina Municipal Police
Station on January 15, 2026. Id. at 2-3. Petitioner is currently
in the physical custody of Respondents at the Aguadilla Processing
Center. Id.
Petitioner argues that he was illegally detained and that if
no action is taken, he will be transferred from the detention
center in Aguadilla, Puerto Rico to the mainland United States
within 72 hours, as there are allegedly no formal immigration
detention centers in Puerto Rico. Id. at 9. Petitioner further
contends that his detention is a violation of his constitutional
rights to due process and is not justified under the Immigration
and Nationality Act (the “INA”). Id. at 3.
In his Emergency Motion, Petitioner reiterates that absent
judicial intervention, he faces imminent transfer outside of the
District of Puerto Rico that would cause irreparable harm by
severely interfering with his right to counsel. (Docket No. 3 at
2). Accordingly, Petitioner asks that the Court enjoin Respondents
from transferring or relocating him outside the District of Puerto
Rico; that he be granted access to counsel; and that Respondents
show cause on an expedited basis as to why said relief should not
remain in effect pending further proceedings regarding his
Petition. Id. at 4.
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 3 of 6

Civil No. 26-1041(RAM) 4
II. DISCUSSION
When evaluating a request for a temporary restraining order,
courts must consider the same four factors that apply to a motion
for preliminary injunction, namely: (1) the likelihood of success
on the merits; (2) the potential for irreparable harm if the
request is denied; (3) the balance of hardships; and (4) whether
the TRO is in the public interest. See Charlesbank Equity Fund II
v. Blinds To Go, Inc., 370 F.3d 151, 161-162 (1st Cir. 2004) (“We
hold that the traditional four-part preliminary injunction
standard applies in full flower to motions brought under Rule 65
in hopes of securing prejudgment freeze orders.”).
Furthermore, courts may issue a temporary restraining order
only if:
(A) specific facts in an affidavit or a
verified complaint clearly show that immediate
and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will
result to the movant before the adverse party
can be heard in opposition; and
(B) the movant’s attorney certifies in writing
any efforts made to give notice and the
reasons why it should not be required.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1). It has long been established that under
federal law, ex parte temporary restraining orders “should be
restricted to serving their underlying purpose of preserving
the status quo and preventing irreparable harm just so long as is
necessary to hold a hearing, and no longer.” Granny Goose Foods,
Inc. v. Bhd. of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers Loc. No. 70 of
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 4 of 6

Civil No. 26-1041(RAM) 5
Alameda Cnty., 415 U.S. 423, 439 (1974) (emphasis added).
Therefore, “[t]emporary restraining orders ‘must be used sparingly
and only in cases where the need for extraordinary equitable relief
is clear and plain.’” Ginzburg v. Martinez-Davila, 368 F. Supp. 3d
343, 347 (D.P.R. 2019) (quoting Northwest Bypass Grp. v. United
States Army Corps. of Eng'rs, 453 F.Supp.2d 333, 338 (D.N.H.
2006)).
The Court finds that in the case at bar, Petitioner has
sufficiently met his burden. Accordingly, the Court hereby GRANTS
Petitioner’s Emergency Motion at Docket No. 3 and ORDERS the
following:
1. Respondents shall not transfer Mr. Zorrilla-Lora outside
of the District of Puerto Rico for a period of ten (10)
days.
2. Not later than Tuesday, January 27, 2026 at 6:00 p.m.,
Respondents shall respond to:
a. Petitioner’s pending Petition for Writ of Habeas
Corpus at Docket No. 1;
b. Petitioner’s pending Urgent Motion Requesting Order
at Docket No. 2;
3. Petitioners shall notify this order to Respondents no later
than 12:00 p.m. on Monday, January 26, 2026.
4. Petitioners shall post a bond of $100.00 by 5:00 p.m. on
Monday, January 26, 2026; and
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 5 of 6

Civil No. 26-1041(RAM) 6
5. Petitioners shall serve process upon Respondents.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
In San Juan Puerto Rico, this 23rd day of January 2026 at 9:25
p.m.
S/ RAÚL M. ARIAS-MARXUACH
United States District Judge
Case 3:26-cv-01041-RAM Document 7 Filed 01/23/26 Page 6 of 6