Parra v. Favro et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 9:26-cv-00363-AMN Document9 Filed 03/25/26 Page1of3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

GLORIA REGINA GARCIA PARRA,
Petitioner,
Vv. 9:26-cv-00363 (AMN)

DAVID FAVRO, in his official capacity as
Warden of the Clinton County Jail; JAMES
BAUSCH, in his official capacity as Acting

Deputy Field Office Director, Buffalo Field
Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs
Enforcement; PHILIP RHONEY, in his
Official capacity as Acting Field Office
Director, Buffalo. Field Office, US.
Immigration & Customs Enforcement;
TODD LYONS, in his official capacity as
Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement; PAMELA BONDI ,

in her official capacity as U.S. Attorney
General; KRISTI NOEM,! in her official
capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security,

Respondents.
APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL:
BOROWSKI WITMER MATTHEW BOROWSKI, ESQ.
IMMIGRATION LAWYERS
4343 Union Road
Buffalo, New York 14225
Attorneys for Petitioner
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE DAVID M. KATZ, ESQ.
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Assistant United States Attorney

100 South Clinton Street

Syracuse, New York 13261

Counsel for Federal Respondents
Bausch, Rhoney, Lyons, Bondi, and Noem

' Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a public “officer’s successor is
automatically substituted as a party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(d).

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

1

Case 9:26-cv-00363-AMN Document9 Filed 03/25/26 Page 2of3

NO APPEARANCES:

DAVID FAVRO
State Respondent

Hon. Anne M. Nardacci, United States District Judge:
ORDER

Petitioner Gloria Regina Garcia Parra (‘‘Petitioner’’) is a noncitizen who, as of next week,
will have resided in the United States for seventeen years. Dkt. No. 3-1 at 44. According to
documents submitted by the Federal Respondents, Petitioner has no criminal history. Dkt. No. 3-
2 at 6. Petitioner’s husband is an American citizen, as are their three minor children. Dkt. No. 1
at § 31; Dkt. No. 4 at 1, 5. In May 2016, Petitioner’s husband filed a Form I-130 Petition for Alien
Relative “on her behalf, which is the first step in the process to gain lawful permanent status.”
Chen v. Noem, No. 26-cv-1109, 2026 WL 380712, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 11, 2026). United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) approved this petition in December 2016. Dkt.
No. 7-1 at 95. Petitioner subsequently filed additional applications with immigration authorities,
including a Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Legal Status. Jd.
at § 7; see also Dkt. No. 5. In connection with one of these pending applications, Petitioner and
her husband attended a scheduled appointment with USCIS in Albany on March 6, 2026. Dkt. No.
3-2 at 5; Dkt. No. 7-1 at § 4. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents (“ICE”)
arrested Petitioner at that time and transported her to the Clinton County Jail, where she has been
detained since. Dkt. No. 3-1 at JJ 13, 15.

After considering submissions from the parties, Dkt. Nos. 1, 3-5, 7-8, and arguments made

during a hearing on March 17, 2026, the Court grants the Emergency Petition for Writ of Habeas

Case 9:26-cv-00363-AMN Document9 Filed 03/25/26 Page3of3

Corpus, Dkt. No. 1 (‘Petition’), and orders the immediate release of Petitioner.* The Court will
issue a written decision setting forth the reasons for this Order in more detail in due course.

Accordingly, the Court hereby

ORDERS that the Petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Dkt. No. 1, is GRANTED; and the
Court further

ORDERS that Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner from custody; and the
Court further

ORDERS that Respondents shall certify compliance with this Order by filing a status
report by 3:00 p.m. on March 26, 2026; and the Court further

ORDERS that, absent a change in relevant circumstances, Respondents may not detain

Petitioner for any immigration-related reason absent further order of this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 25, 2026 Que, Vian WARE
Albany, New York Anne M. Nardacci

U.S. District Judge

* As clarified by Petitioner’s counsel during and after the hearing, Petitioner is not challenging her
order of removal in this proceeding, see generally Ozturk v. Hyde, 136 F.4th 382 (2d Cir. 2025),
and she has instead made submissions in an immigration court, Dkt. No. 8. See also Dkt. No. 3-1
at ¥ 14.