Nazario Radilla Valdovinos, a Mexican citizen, has been held at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center since November 3, 2025, pending removal proceedings. ICE issued a custody determination continuing his detention without providing him an opportunity to post bond or be released on other conditions. His case arose following a nationwide class action, Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, which certified a class of noncitizens who were not provided custody redetermination hearings under federal immigration law.
Judge Staton granted the petition after federal officials conceded that Valdovinos was entitled to relief. As Staton wrote, 'Respondents' acknowledgement that Petitioner is entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a)' formed the basis for her ruling. The court ordered that 'Respondents are enjoined from continuing to detain Petitioner unless he is provided with a bond hearing pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within seven (7) days of this Order.'
The government's concession came after initially resisting Valdovinos's request for a custody hearing. In their response filed April 10, federal officials acknowledged that 'Petitioner appears to be an eligible member of the Bond Eligible Class certified in Maldonado Bautista, and accordingly, entitled to a bond hearing under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a).' They requested that any ordered hearing timeline be 'consistent with what courts in this district have generally ordered, which is to require a Section 1226(a) bond hearing be held within seven days.'
Valdovinos's case stems from the broader Maldonado Bautista litigation, which resulted in a November 2025 ruling by another Central District judge certifying a nationwide class. After that decision, Valdovinos filed a motion for a custody redetermination hearing before the Executive Office for Immigration Review. However, an immigration judge denied his motion, concluding the court lacked jurisdiction and citing a Board of Immigration Appeals decision in Matter of Yajure Hurtado. The immigration judge acknowledged the Maldonado Bautista order but noted that a 'current stay' was in effect, referring to the Ninth Circuit's March 6, 2026 administrative stay.
The immigration judge's written decision stated that based on an 'independent assessment of relevant law, regulations, statutes, and caselaw,' the court lacked jurisdiction over Valdovinos's custody redetermination request. However, as Judge Staton noted, the Ninth Circuit's stay 'left the judgment in effect as to the Central District of California,' where Valdovinos is detained.
Valdovinos's petition raised five claims challenging his continued detention, including violations of federal immigration law, DHS bond regulations, the Administrative Procedure Act, Fifth Amendment due process rights, and the Maldonado Bautista declaratory judgment. The court granted only the claim alleging a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), the federal statute governing custody determinations for certain detained immigrants.
Judge Staton also ordered that 'Respondents are ENJOINED from transferring, relocating, or removing Petitioner outside of the Central District of California pending final resolution of this case.' The parties must file a joint status report within ten days addressing the outcome of the bond hearing and whether the case has become moot.
The ruling represents another victory for immigration detainees challenging prolonged custody without individualized hearings. The case will continue before a magistrate judge on the remaining claims and the mootness issue, depending on the outcome of Valdovinos's ordered bond hearing.