Allaico Pacheco et al v. Joyce et al

4:25-cv-05796Txsd2 déc. 2025

Texte intégral

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
MARIA SONIA ALLAICO PACHECO, et
al.,
Petitioners,
-against-
WILLIAM P. JOYCE, et al.,
Respondents.
25-CV-09348 (JAV)
TRANSFER ORDER
JEANNETTE A. VARGAS, United States District Judge:
Petitioners have filed a Petition for the writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
For the following reasons, the Court transfers this action to the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Texas.
In order to entertain a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a court must have
jurisdiction over the custodian. See Braden v. 30th Jud. Cir. Ct. of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 494-95
(1973) (writ of habeas corpus does not act upon the prisoner who seek relief, but upon his or her
custodian). Thus, the jurisdiction of a habeas petition challenging a petitioner’s physical
confinement generally lies in the district of his confinement. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426,
442 (2004).
Petitioners were not located in the Southern District of New York at the time they filed
this Petition, and therefore, the Court does not have jurisdiction over their custodian, see Padilla,
542 U.S. at 441. Accordingly, upon consent of the parties, and in the interest of justice, the
Court transfers this petition to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a), 1406(a).
Case 4:25-cv-05796 Document 11 Filed on 12/02/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 2
2
CONCLUSION
The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Texas.
To ensure that Petitioners have an opportunity to have this petition considered by the
Southern District of Texas, and to preserve that court’s jurisdiction to rule on the Petition, the
Court hereby ORDERS that Petitioners shall not be removed from the United States absent
further court order. See, e.g., Khalil v. Joyce, No. 25-CV-1935 (JMF), 2025 WL 750599, at *1
(S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2025) (citing cases); see also, e.g., Du v. United States Dep’t of Homeland
Sec., No. 25-CV-0644 (OAW), 2025 WL 1317944, at *1 (D. Conn. Apr. 24, 2025) (“[A] a federal
court may temporarily enjoin immigration authorities from deporting individuals if it preserves
the court’s jurisdiction over a case or cases.”).
The Court waives Local Civil Rule 83.1, which requires a seven-day delay before the
Clerk of Court may transfer a case, and directs immediate transfer.
The United States Attorney is directed forthwith to alert the Chief of the Civil
Division United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Texas of the transfer
of this matter.
This order closes the case in the Southern District of New York.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: 	December 2, 2025
New York, New York
JEANNETTE A. VARGAS
United States District Judge
Case 4:25-cv-05796 Document 11 Filed on 12/02/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 2

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.