Rodriguez Vidal v. Gonzalez

1 / 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BROWNSVILLE DIVISION
YAONDRI RODRIGUEZ VIDAL,
Plaintiffs,
VS.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-CV-324
ADAM R. GONZALEZ,
Defendant.
ORDER
Plaintiff Yaondri Rodriguez Vidal filed this habeas action to challenge his detention by
United States immigration authorities. (Pet., Doc. 1) Since August 13, 2025, Rodriguez has been
detained at the Port Isabel Service Processing Center in Cameron County, Texas, subject to a final
order of removal.
Rodriguez contests his ongoing detention under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001),
alleging that his detention has become impermissibly lengthy and violates his constitutional
rights. On January 20, 2026, a United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 11), recommending that Plaintiffs’ claims be dismissed without prejudice.
(R&R, Doc. 11) The Report and Recommendation correctly observed that, at the time it was
issued, Rodriguez’s detention remained within the six-month period of post-removal order
detention that is presumptively reasonable under Zadvydas. (R&R, Doc. 11). No party filed
objections.
“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear
error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b),
Advisory Comm. Note (1983). The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finds
no clear error within it.
As a result, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11). It is:
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
February 24, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 1:25-cv-00324 Document 15 Filed 02/24/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2 / 2
ORDERED that Yaondri Rodriguez Vidal’s causes of action are DISMISSED without
prejudice.
The Court notes that during the Court’s consideration of the Report and Recommendation,
Rodriguez’s post-removal order detention exceeded six months. This Order does not preclude
Rodriguez’s ability to initiate a new habeas action under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001),
in which he would have to demonstrate that no significant likelihood exists of removal in the
reasonably foreseeable future.
Each party shall bear its own fees and costs.
This is a final and appealable order.
The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
Signed on February 24, 2026.
____________________________
Fernando Rodriguez, Jr.
United States District Judge
Case 1:25-cv-00324 Document 15 Filed 02/24/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2