Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and F.S.V.V. v. Francis
Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and F.S.V.V. v. Ladeon Francis, Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, New York Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Todd Lyons, Acting Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Kristi Noem, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Pam Bondi, U.S. Attorney General; and Executive Office for Immigration Review
- Katherine Failla
- 1:25-cv-09465
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Villarreal Obregon v. Francis: Judge Failla ordered a $5 fee or IFP application, warned of dismissal, and denied appeal fee status.
Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and F.S.V.V., whose habeas petition was subject to the fee-or-application requirement; Eduardo Fabian Arias, who filed the petition as their representative and was proceeding without a lawyer.
What happened
Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and F.S.V.V. filed a petition asking the court to review their detention through a habeas corpus case. Eduardo Fabian Arias filed it for them as their representative and was proceeding without a lawyer.
The court said that either Obregon or Arias had to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a completed and signed application to proceed without paying it upfront by December 15, 2025. The court warned that it would dismiss the case if they did not comply or ask for more time.
Judge Failla also said that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue because the petition did not currently make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. She denied permission to appeal without paying fees and directed the Clerk to mail the order to Arias.
The detailed version
- Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and F.S.V.V. v. Francis · No. 1:25-cv-09465
- Katherine Failla
- Nov. 17, 2025
Background
Rocio Gladys Villarreal Obregon and her minor child, F.S.V.V., filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus through their representative, Eduardo Fabian Arias. Arias was proceeding without a lawyer. The opinion does not decide the underlying habeas claims.
Filing Fee or Fee Waiver
The court explained that filing the petition required either payment of a $5 filing fee or submission of a completed and signed application to proceed without prepaying fees, commonly called an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Neither Obregon nor Arias had paid the fee or filed that application when the case was filed.
The court ordered Obregon or Arias to pay the $5 fee or submit the completed and signed application by December 15, 2025. If the application were granted, the case could proceed without prepayment of the fee. The court stated that it would dismiss the action if they did not comply by the deadline and did not request additional time.
Appeal-Related Rulings
The court stated that, at that time, the petition did not make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. It therefore ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
Other Direction
The court said Arias could receive court documents by email by completing a consent form. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail a copy of the order to Arias at the address listed on the docket.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.