govinfo:USCOURTS-pawd-3_26-cv-01113-0

1 
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 
ORLIN OSMIN MURILLO AGUIRRE, ) 
 ) 
 Petitioner, ) No. 3:26-cv-01113-CB 
 ) 
 v. ) Chief Judge Cathy Bissoon 
 ) 
TODD BLANCHE, et al., ) 
 ) 
 Respondent s. ) 
 
 
MEMORANDUM ORDER 
 
The Court hereby DENIES Petitioner’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order 
(Doc. 3) (the “TRO Motion” or “Mot.”). 
On June 12, 2026, Petitioner filed the TRO Motion alongside a Petition for Writ of 
Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) (the “Petition” or “Pet.”). Petitioner represents that he is a native and 
citizen of Honduras currently held at the Moshannon Valley Processing Center (“Moshannon”) 
following his detention by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on June 9, 2026. Pet. 
¶¶ 1, 2. Prior to Petitioner’s detention, he had resided in the United States for approximately 
four years, establishing a “fixed and stable” address in New Jersey. Id. ¶¶ 2, 21. Petitioner has 
no criminal history. Id. ¶ 24. 
Substantively, Petitioner challenges his continued detention pending removal proceedings 
without an individualized bond hearing under 8 United States Code Section 1226 and the Due 
Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The TRO Motion requests that the Court: (1) prohibit 
Respondents from transferring petitioner outside the Western District of Pennsylvania pending 
adjudication of his habeas petition, (2) prohibit Respondents from removing Petitioner from the 
United States pending adjudication, (3) order Respondents to confirm Petitioner’s current 

2 
 
location and custody status within three days, (4) order Respondents to maintain Petitioner at 
Moshannon, (5) order Respondents to produce all charging documents and disclose the statutory 
basis for Petitioner’s detention within three days and (6) schedule expedited briefing and/or a 
hearing on Petitioner’s habeas petition. Mot. at 7. The requested relief will not be granted at this 
time. 
Petitioner’s Motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) seeks essentially the same 
substantive relief already sought in his Petition. As such, the Court finds no reason to entertain it 
separately. The Court promptly will consider this relief when determining the merits of the 
Petition on an expedited case management schedule, and finds no reason to issue a TRO as well. 
Moreover, Petitioner has not demonstrated such immediate and irreparable injury to justify the 
issuance of a TRO without notice to Respondents or an opportunity for them to be heard. See 
Fed. R. Civ. P. R. 65(b) (authorizing TRO without notice if the facts “clearly show that 
immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to the movant before the adverse 
party can be heard in opposition”). Petitioner’s transfer to an immigration detention facility 
outside this district would not deprive the Court of jurisdiction over the Petition. See Khalil v. 
President, United States, 164 F.4th 259, 269–71, 273 (3d Cir. 2026) (holding that habeas 
jurisdiction remains with the district of the detainee’s confinement at the time of filing, 
regardless of subsequent transfer of the detainee out of the district or amendment of the 

3 
 
petition).1 Nor does it appear that Respondents could immediately remove Petitioner, given the 
posture of his removal proceedings.2 
 
IT IS SO ORDERED. 
 
June 13, 2026 s/C athy Bissoon 
 Cathy Bissoon 
 Chief United States District Judge 
 
 
 
cc (via ECF email notification): 
All Counsel of Record 
 
1 Additionally, the Court has doubts as to whether it has jurisdiction to enjoin 
Respondents from transferring Petitioner to another detention facility. See 8 U.S.C. § 
1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) ((“Notwithstanding any other provision of law . . . , including section 2241 of 
title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, . . . no court shall have jurisdiction to review . . . 
any [] decision or action of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security the 
authority for which is specified under this subchapter to be in the discretion of the Attorney 
General or the Secretary of Homeland Security . . . .”); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(g)(1) (“The Attorney 
General shall arrange for appropriate places of detention for aliens detained pending removal or a 
decision on removal.”). 
2 At the time that the TRO Motion was filed, Exhibit C to the Petition indicates that 
Petitioner will have a master calendar hearing in immigration court on June 23, 2026. Pet. Ex. C 
(Doc. 1-4). 

Passage view · GavelSight