Chen Quan v. Warden, Otero County Processing Center, Mary De Anda-Ybarra, Field...

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO CHEN QUAN, Petitioner, v. Civ. No. 26-0682-KG-LF WARDEN, Otero County Processing Center, MARY DE ANDA-YBARRA, Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, El Paso Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; TODD LYONS, Acting Director Immigration and Customs Enforcement; KRISTI NOEM, Secretary, U.S. Department Of Homeland Security; AND PAMELA BONDI, U.S. Attorney General, Respondents,1 ORDER TO ANSWER This matter is before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. (Doc. 1) (Petition). Also before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 3) (TRO Motion). Petitioner is an immigration detainee at the Otero County Processing Center and is proceeding pro se. The Petition states he entered the United States in January of 2024; was released on his own recognizance; and was re-detailed without adequate process in May of 2025. (Doc. 1) at 2. Petitioner seeks a release from custody or, alternatively, an adequate bond hearing. Id. at 3.

Having conducted an initial review of the claims, the Court finds the Petition is not subject The Court will substitute or add the above-mentioned parties as Respondents. See Torres-Torres v. Miller, 2020 WL 4430519 (D.N.M. July 31, 2020) (discussing the respondents in an immigration habeas case); 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). to summary dismissal. The Clerk’s Office has electronically served Respondents - including the Respondents added in this Order - by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) using the Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system. (Doc. 2). The Court will set a briefing schedule on the Petition, as set forth below. The Court notes that Petitioner has not paid the $5.00 filing fee for this action. Petitioner must either prepay the fee or, alternatively, file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty (30) days of entry of this Order.

With respect to the TRO Motion, relief will be denied in part. A petitioner seeking a TRO “must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief,” and that the balance of equities and public interest favor relief. Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Aside from noting Petitioner has a chronic lung nodule, the TRO Motion fails to show he is likely to suffer irreparable harm absent an emergency order. The TRO Motion raises the same claims and seeks the same relief as the Petition, but on an emergency basis. TROs are generally used to preserve the status quo until a case can be decided, rather than as a mechanism to obtain a final merits disposition. See Resolution Trust v. Cruce, 972 F.2d 1195, 1198 (10th Cir. 1992) (a TRO is meant to “preserve the status quo” before a final decision on the merits). Finally, expedited relief is unnecessary, as this Court reviews Section 2241 immigration petitions immediately and rules on them as soon as possible. The TRO Motion will be denied, in part, without prejudice to granting relief after the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) files a response. To preserve Petitioner’s claims, the Court will enjoin the Government from transferring Petitioner from the District of New Mexico while this case remains pending.

IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The USAO 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, he must do so within seven (7) business days after the response is filed.

3. The Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (Doc. 3) is denied in part, as set forth above.

4. The Government is enjoined from transferring Petitioner from the District of New Mexico while this case remains pending.

5. Petitioner shall pay the $5.00 filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty (30) days of entry of this Order. /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.