VAN v. ODDO et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JOHNSTOWN DIVISION
SEREYRATH VAN,
Petitioner,
vs.
LEONARD ODDO, IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS WARDEN OF
MOSHANNON VALLEY
PROCESSING CENTER; BRIAN
MCSHANE, IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS ACTING FIELD
OFFICE DIRECTOR OF THE
IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS
ENFORCEMENT, ENFORCEMENT
AND REMOVAL OPERATIONS
PHILADELPHIA FIELD OFFICE;
KRISTI NOEM, IN HER OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; AND PAM BONDI, IN
HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE
UNITED STATES;
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil Action No. 3:25-cv-00322
United States Magistrate Judge
Christopher B. Brown
ORDER
AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2025, for the reasons stated in the
Memorandum Opinion contemporaneously filed herewith, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, ECF No. 1, is CONDITIONALLY
GRANTED.
Case 3:25-cv-00322-CBB Document 16 Filed 12/05/25 Page 1 of 3

2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Petitioner shall be provided a bond hearing
before a neutral immigration judge of the Executive Office of Immigration Review
on or before December 19, 2025. At said bond hearing, the Government shall bear
the burden to justify Petitioner’s detention by clear and convincing evidence. See
German Santos v. Warden Pike Cnty. Corr. Fac., 965 F.3d 203, 213 (3d Cir. 2020).
“That evidence must be individualized and support a finding that continued
detention is needed to prevent him from fleeing or harming the community.” Id. at
214.
This Order should not be read to constrain the immigration court from
considering additional factors that normally are available to it in the context of an
immigration bond hearing, such as alternatives to detention or the Petitioner’s
ability to pay, to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the Government’s
burden, as set forth in German Santos.
If Respondents fail to provide Petitioner with a bond hearing satisfying those
requirements by December 19, 2025, the WRIT SHALL ISSUE, and Petitioner
shall be released with conditions of supervision consistent with applicable law.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel for the parties shall file notice of
the date and time of the bond hearing on the docket in this matter once the hearing
is scheduled. The parties shall notify this Court of the outcome of the hearing
within three business days of its completion.
Case 3:25-cv-00322-CBB Document 16 Filed 12/05/25 Page 2 of 3

3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, to the extent Petitioner seeks any additional
habeas relief, the same is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Clerk’s Office is directed to mark this case
CLOSED.
AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1)(B) of the
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, any party wishing to appeal from this Order
must file a Notice of Appeal within 60 days.
BY THE COURT:
s/Christopher B. Brown
Christopher B. Brown
United States Magistrate Judge
cc: 	All Counsel of Record
(via ECF electronic notification)
Case 3:25-cv-00322-CBB Document 16 Filed 12/05/25 Page 3 of 3