Chan v. Almodovar
Yun Chan v. Judith Almodovar, in her official capacity as Acting Field Office Director of New York, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Todd Lyons, in his official capacity as Acting Director U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Kristi Noem, in her official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security, Pam Bondi, in her official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:25-cv-07492
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Yun Chan v. Almodovar: Judge Engelmayer temporarily barred removal to preserve jurisdiction while the assigned judge considers Chan’s emergency motion.
Yun Chan may not be removed from the United States unless and until the assigned judge orders otherwise; the government respondents are subject to that temporary jurisdiction-preserving order.
What happened
In Yun Chan v. Judith Almodovar, Chan submitted a petition asking the court to review his immigration detention and a complaint, along with an emergency request to stop his removal from the court’s jurisdiction.
The court did not decide the emergency request. Instead, it ordered that Chan not be removed from the United States unless and until the assigned judge orders otherwise, so the court could retain jurisdiction while the request is considered.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer, sitting temporarily in the court’s Part I capacity, entered this order on September 10, 2025. The order was limited to preserving the court’s jurisdiction and did not decide the underlying petition or complaint.
The detailed version
- Chan v. Almodovar · No. 1:25-cv-07492
- Paul Engelmayer
- Sept. 10, 2025
Background
At approximately 12:07 a.m. on September 10, 2025, counsel for Yun Chan emailed the court a verified petition for a writ of habeas corpus, a complaint, and papers supporting an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO). The proposed TRO would prohibit the government respondents from removing Chan from the Southern District of New York’s jurisdiction. Government counsel received copies of the emailed materials.
The opinion states that the case was expected to be assigned promptly to a district judge who would supervise it on a permanent basis and decide requests for emergency relief.
Court’s Action
Sitting in its Part I capacity, the court ordered that Chan not be removed from the United States unless and until the assigned judge ordered otherwise. The court stated that this measure was solely to preserve its jurisdiction while the assigned judge considered the pending TRO motion. It relied on the All Writs Act, a federal law allowing courts to issue orders needed to protect their jurisdiction over a case.
The order did not rule on whether the TRO should be granted, and it did not decide the merits of Chan’s petition or complaint. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer entered the order on September 10, 2025.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.