Case Name in Immigration Case - Unavailable

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
ELAINE GARCIA-SUAREZ,
Petitioner,
v. No. 2:26-cv-0665-KG-SCY
PAMELA BONDI, Attorney General of the United States;
KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security;
MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA, El Paso Field Office Director,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement; TODD LYONS,
Acting Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and
DORA CASTRO, WARDEN, Otero County Processing Center,
Respondents.1
ORDER TO ANSWER
Before the Court is Petitioner’s pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) (Petition). Petitioner is detained at the Otero County Processing Center in
Chaparral, New Mexico and has paid the habeas filing fee. Petitioner states she has been in
immigration custody since September 8, 2025, and has improperly been denied a bond hearing
under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c). (Doc. 1) at 4-5. Specifically, Petitioner contends she has no criminal
conviction that would trigger mandatory detention under Section 1226(c), and there is no
administrative remedy to challenge her classification by Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(ICE). Id. at 5-6. Petitioner seeks an individualized bond hearing or immediate release from
custody. Id. at 11.
Having conducted an initial review of the Petition, the Court finds the alleged facts raise a
colorable claim for relief. Petitioner alleges she has improperly been denied a bond hearing under
1 The Court adds the above-mentioned parties as Respondents in this case. See Lowmaster v. Dir.,
Bureau of Prisons, 2024 WL 5135970, at *1 (D. Kan. Dec. 17, 2024) (“the Court notes that it
routinely substitutes the” proper parties as “respondent in habeas cases”); Danderson v. Page, 2024
WL 3913051, at *2 (E.D. Okla. Aug. 20, 2024) (substituting the proper party respondent in a habeas
case).
Case 2:26-cv-00665-KG-SCY Document 4 Filed 03/05/26 Page 1 of 2

2
8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), despite not having a criminal conviction that mandates detention under that
statute. The Clerk’s Office has electronically served a copy of the petition in this matter on all
federal respondents by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and
Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system. See (Doc. 2). The United States Attorney’s Office
(USAO) shall answer the Petition within ten (10) business days of entry of this Order and show
cause why the requested relief should not be granted. See Habeas Rules 1(b), 4 (courts have
discretion to set a time for respondents to answer a habeas petition). Petitioner may file an optional
reply within ten (10) business days after the answer brief is filed.
If the USAO declines to timely respond, the Court may enter a separate order directing the
Immigration Court to conduct a bond hearing.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. The United States Attorney’s Office must answer the Petition within ten (10) business days
of entry of this Order and show cause why the requested relief should not be granted;
2. If Petitioner wishes to file an optional reply, she must do so within ten (10) business days
after Respondents’ response is filed; and
3. The Clerk’s Office shall add the additional party Respondents set forth in the caption of this
Order to the docket of this case.
/s/Kenneth J. Gonzales___________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
• Please note that this document has been
electronically filed. To verify its
authenticity, please refer to the Digital File
Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic
Filing) accompanying this document.
Electronically filed documents can be found
on the Court’s PACER public access
system.
Case 2:26-cv-00665-KG-SCY Document 4 Filed 03/05/26 Page 2 of 2