Yaondri Rodriguez Vidal v. Adam R. Gonzalez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT February 24, 2026 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk BROWNSVILLE DIVISION YAONDRI RODRIGUEZ VIDAL, § § Plaintiffs, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:25-CV-324 § ADAM R. GONZALEZ, § § Defendant. § § ORDER Plaintiff Yaondri Rodriguez Vidal filed this habeas action to challenge his detention by United States immigration authorities. (Pet., Doc. 1) Since August 13, 2025, Rodriguez has been detained at the Port Isabel Service Processing Center in Cameron County, Texas, subject to a final order of removal.

Rodriguez contests his ongoing detention under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), alleging that his detention has become impermissibly lengthy and violates his constitutional rights. On January 20, 2026, a United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11), recommending that Plaintiffs’ claims be dismissed without prejudice. (R&R, Doc. 11) The Report and Recommendation correctly observed that, at the time it was issued, Rodriguez’s detention remained within the six-month period of post-removal order detention that is presumptively reasonable under Zadvydas. (R&R, Doc. 11). No party filed objections.

“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b), Advisory Comm. Note (1983). The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation and finds no clear error within it.

As a result, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 11). It is: / 2 ORDERED that Yaondri Rodriguez Vidal’s causes of action are DISMISSED without prejudice.

The Court notes that during the Court’s consideration of the Report and Recommendation, Rodriguez’s post-removal order detention exceeded six months. This Order does not preclude Rodriguez’s ability to initiate a new habeas action under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001), in which he would have to demonstrate that no significant likelihood exists of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future.

Each party shall bear its own fees and costs.

This is a final and appealable order.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

Signed on February 24, 2026.

Fernando Rodriguez, Jr. United States District Judge 2/2