Wu v. Almodovar
Jiandong Wu v. Judith Almodovar, in her official capacity as Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, New York City, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, et al.
- Gregory Woods
- 1:25-cv-08968
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Jiandong Wu v. Judith Almodovar, Judge Woods granted Wu’s petition and ordered his release within one business day.
Jiandong Wu was awarded judgment, and the respondents were ordered to release him within one business day and certify compliance by filing on the docket.
What happened
Jiandong Wu v. Judith Almodovar involved Wu’s petition against Judith Almodovar and other respondents. The judgment does not describe the petition’s specific legal claims.
The court granted Wu’s petition based on the reasons stated in its November 24, 2025 order and the decision in Savane. It ordered the respondents to release Wu within one business day and to file proof of compliance by November 26, 2025. The court entered judgment for Wu and closed the case.
Judge Gregory Woods presided over the case. The judgment was dated November 25, 2025.
The detailed version
- Wu v. Almodovar · No. 1:25-cv-08968
- Gregory Woods
- Nov. 25, 2025
Background
Jiandong Wu filed a petition against Judith Almodovar, in her official capacity as Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations, New York City, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and other respondents. The judgment itself does not explain the petition’s specific claims or the underlying facts.
Ruling
The court stated that, for the reasons in its November 24, 2025 order, Wu’s petition was granted for the reasons set out in the court’s decision in Savane, 2025 WL 2774452. The judgment does not repeat the legal reasoning from those materials.
Relief and disposition
The respondents were directed to release Wu within one business day of the judgment. They were also directed to certify compliance by filing on the docket no later than November 26, 2025. Judgment was entered in favor of Wu, and the case was closed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.