Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00004

#1

Jan 02, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Javier A Giron Garcia. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12717440) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Martin, Michael) (Entered: 01/02/2026)

#2

Jan 02, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Javier A Giron Garcia. (Attachments: # 1 TRO Checklist, # 2 Exhibits, # 3 Memorandum, # 4 Proposed Order)(Martin, Michael) (Entered: 01/02/2026)

#3

Jan 02, 2026

Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider

#4

Jan 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/2/2026: (Text Only Entry).Pending the issuance of the court's order resolving the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that respondents shall not take any action to remove petitioner from the United States or to move petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (acknowledging the courts express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction). Given the exigent circumstances present, the court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending its forthcoming order resolving petitioner's pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order. Further, no later than today, 1/2/2026, by 5:00 PM, petitioner's counsel is DIRECTED (1) to serve respondents with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers, along with this order, to the United States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov; and (2) to promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter Notices of Appearance. Respondents shall file a written opposition to the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM on Monday, 1/5/2026. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this courts decision in Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties proposal. (Deputy Clerk CGH) (Entered: 01/02/2026)

#5

Jan 02, 2026

CONSENT/DECLINE of U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1), this document is restricted to attorneys and court staff only. Judges do not have access to view this document and will be informed of a party's response only if all parties have consented to the referral. (Martin, Michael) (Entered: 01/02/2026)

#6

Jan 02, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

Jan 02, 2026

Minute Order

#7

Jan 05, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#8

Jan 06, 2026

Reply to Response to Motion

#9

Jan 06, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/6/2026: In respondents opposition (Doc. No. 7 ) to petitioners pending motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ), respondents acknowledge[] that this case is in the same posture as Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025). (Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Accordingly, pursuant to the courts reasoning as stated in Ayala Cajina, petitioners motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ) is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Respondents are ORDERED to immediately RELEASE petitioner from respondents custody on the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his detention on or about 12/1/2025; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner for any purpose, absent exigent circumstances, without providing petitioner notice and a pre-detention hearing before an immigration judge where respondents will have the burden to demonstrate a change in circumstances justifying petitioners re-detention. Under the circumstances of this case, petitioner will not be required to post bond pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The parties are directed to meet and confer and, if possible, submit a joint proposed briefing schedule and hearing date with respect to any motion for a preliminary injunction no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of entry of this order. (Deputy Clerk RAA) (Entered: 01/06/2026)

Jan 06, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

#10

Jan 20, 2026

RESPONSE by Javier Adrian Giron Garcia to Minute Order, ECF No. 9. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Counsel)(Martin, Michael) Modified on 1/21/2026 (KLY). (Entered: 01/20/2026)