Ramon R.C. v. Samuel J. Olson
Ramon R.C. v. Samuel J. Olson, Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, St. Paul Field Office, Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Kristi Noem, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Todd Lyons, in his official capacity as acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Joel Brott, Sherburne County Jail Sheriff
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:25-cv-03811
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Ramon R.C. v. Olson, Judge Tostrud ordered a bond hearing within seven days but denied immediate release and related injunctive requests.
Ramon R.C. is entitled to a bond hearing within seven days, while the respondents are required to provide it; the order did not require Ramon’s immediate release.
What happened
Ramon R.C. asked the federal court for release from immigration detention or, alternatively, a bond hearing. The respondents argued that federal law required his continued detention without a hearing.
The court granted the habeas petition in part and denied it in part. It ordered the respondents to provide Ramon with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven days, but denied his request for immediate release. The court also denied his first request for emergency relief as moot and denied part of his amended request while denying the rest as moot.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, overruled the respondents’ objection, and entered judgment consistent with those rulings.
The detailed version
- Ramon R.C. v. Samuel J. Olson · No. 0:25-cv-03811
- Eric Tostrud
- Jan. 7, 2026
Background
Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation recommending that Ramon R.C.’s amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus be granted to the extent Ramon sought a bond hearing. The respondents objected, arguing that Ramon was properly detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2) and therefore subject to mandatory detention.
Because the respondents objected, Judge Tostrud reviewed the recommendation independently under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and the local court rules. He concluded that Magistrate Judge Brisbois’s analysis and conclusions were correct.
Rulings
The court accepted the report and recommendation in full and overruled the respondents’ objection.
The court granted in part and denied in part Ramon’s amended habeas petition:
- The petition was granted to the extent Ramon sought a bond hearing. The respondents were ordered to provide him with a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven days. - The petition was denied to the extent Ramon sought immediate release.
The court also ruled on Ramon’s requests for emergency injunctive relief. It denied the initial motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction as moot. It denied the amended motion to the extent it sought an order preventing the respondents from transferring Ramon out of the District of Minnesota while the case was pending. The remainder of the amended motion was denied as moot.
Effect of the Order
The order required a bond hearing but did not order Ramon’s immediate release. It also did not grant the requested order preventing his transfer out of the district.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.