A federal judge on Monday directed the federal government to respond to a claim that it moved a man in immigration detention outside out Colorado, despite a temporary restraining order forbidding such a transfer.

Because of the federal rules governing immigration cases, the vast majority of Hossein Batooie’s three-week-old proceedings is shielded from public view. However, his attorneys filed a habeas corpus action on July 2, which is a longstanding legal tool used to challenge one’s confinement.

In an order issued the following day, U.S. District Court Judge Gordon P. Gallagher summarized that Batooie is “a 60-year-old Christian convert from Iran.” U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was allegedly seeking to remove him to an unknown location.

Citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s directive that the government must provide due process, Gallagher temporarily blocked immigration authorities from removing Batooie from Colorado.

“Further, the record suggests that Petitioner may be placed in immediate danger to his life if he were to be returned to Iran,” wrote Gallagher, who indicated he was filling in for U.S. District Court Judge Daniel D. Domenico, the regular judge on the case who was unavailable to intervene immediately.

Although Gallagher set a hearing before Domenico for July 10, the government indicated it needed more time to respond to Batooie’s petition. Domenico agreed to let the government investigate Batooie’s 2004 immigration proceedings. He extended Gallagher’s temporary restraining order through July 31, with a hearing to be held shortly before its expiration.

However, on Saturday, Batooie’s lawyers filed a letter with the court regarding the “transfer of Petitioner to Wyoming in violation of the TRO.”

Domenico ordered the government to respond to the letter by the end of Monday.

The filing is publicly unavailable and Batooie’s attorneys did not respond to a request for the letter itself.

Colorado Politics asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office to address the allegation and to say where Batooie is. A spokesperson said the office has no comment.

The case is Batooie v. Ceja et al.