Ayala Ayala v. Frink et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 4:25-cv-05832 Document17_ Filed 02/06/26 in TXSD Page1of2
United States District Court

Southem District of Texas
ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT February 06, 2026
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
HOUSTON DIVISION
JUAN MIGUEL AYALA AYALA, §
§
Petitioner, §
§
VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO, 4:25-CV-05832
§
MARTIN L. FRINK, et al, §
§
Respondents, §
ORDER

Before the Court are United States Magistrate Judge Peter Bray’s Memorandum and
Recommendation filed on January 20, 2026 (Doc. #14) and Respondents’ Objections (Doc, #16).
The Magistrate Judge’s findings and conclusions are reviewed de novo. Fed, R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28
ULS.C, § 636(b)(1); United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (th Cir. 1989). Having
reviewed the parties’ arguments and the applicable legal authority, the Court adopts in part and
declines to adopt in part the Memorandum and Recommendation (Doc. #14).

The Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Bray’s well-reasoned conclusion that Petitioner
falls under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and is thus entitled to habeas relief. Doc. #14 at 6-7. However, the
Court respectfully declines to adopt Magistrate Judge Bray’s recommendation that Respondents
be ordered to provide Petitioner with an individualized bond hearing. fd at 7, This Court has
determined that for an undocumented detainee—such as Petitioner—who has no criminal history,
poses no flight risk, and presents no other reason to compel detention, the appropriate remedy is
immediate release. E.g., Lopez-Tipaz v. Noem, et al., 4:25-cv-4905 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 25, 2025);

Martinez Mendez v. Noem, et al., 4:25-cv-4981 (S.D. Tex. Nov. 25, 2025).

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 4:25-cv-05832 Document17_ Filed 02/06/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2

In conclusion, the Court adopts in part and declines to adopt in part the Memorandum and
Recommendation (Doc. #14). Accordingly, Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
(Doc, #1) is hereby GRANTED, Respondents’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #10) is
DENIED. It is further ORDERED that:

1, Respondents are directed to release Petitioner from custody, under appropriate
conditions of release, within forty-eight (48) hours of entry of this Order. Petitioner
shail be released in a public place within the Southern District of Texas, and his counsel
shall be given notice of the time and place of her release;

2. Petitioner shall comply with all reporting requirements set by U.S, Immigrations and
Customs Enforcement while his removal proceedings remain pending;

3, This Order may be served by facsimile, email, or any other means reasonably calculated

to provide immediate notice,
It is so ORDERED,

FEB 06 2026

Date The Honorable Alfred H, Bennett
United Statés District Judge