Bin v. Holder, 3:14-cv-00104

Petitioner Yang Bin, a Chinese national and lawful permanent resident, was convicted in 1996 of first-degree murder in aid of racketeering and sentenced to 262 months.
An immigration judge ordered Bin removed on September 29, 1993; his removal order became final and he had no pending appeals.
ICE took Bin into custody on July 16, 2003; the statutory 90-day removal period ran and removal was not accomplished.
ICE conducted custody reviews and, by October 22, 2013, indicated that jurisdiction for post-order custody review would be transferred to the HQ Post-Order Custody Review Unit (HQPDU) if Bin was not removed by January 10, 2014.
The six-month presumptively reasonable detention period recognized in Zadvydas expired; Bin filed a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 seeking review of the lawfulness of continued detention.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Bin’s continued detention beyond the presumptive 6-month Zadvydas period is unlawful	Bin contends continued detention is unlawful and seeks release review under 8 C.F.R. § 241.13	ICE implicitly argues custody review procedures apply and jurisdiction moved to HQPDU, requiring HQ review before habeas relief	Court denied habeas without prejudice and directed ICE to treat petition as a §241.13 request to HQPDU
Whether district court should refer habeas petition to ICE for §241.13 review	Bin seeks immediate judicial determination	ICE procedures and regulations provide administrative review mechanism post-6 months	Court exercised discretion to refer the matter to ICE (HQPDU) rather than grant habeas relief

Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (limits post-removal-period detention; recognizes a 6-month presumptively reasonable detention period and shifts burden to government after that period)