Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00088

#1

Jan 06, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Juan Carlos Mora Martinez. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12730277) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit) (Crabtree, Kevin) (Entered: 01/06/2026)

#2

Jan 06, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Juan Carlos Mora Martinez. (Attachments: # 1 TRO Checklist, # 2 Proof of Service, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Proposed Order) (JJD) (Crabtree, Kevin) (Entered: 01/06/2026)

#3

Jan 06, 2026

APPLICATION for ISSUANCE of Order to Show Cause by Juan Carlos Mora Martinez. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Crabtree, Kevin) (Entered: 01/06/2026)

#4

Jan 06, 2026

Prisoner New Case Documents for DJ Presider

#5

Jan 07, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/7/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Respondents shall file an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to the 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 12:00 PM on 1/9/2026. In their response, Respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decisions in Labrador-Prato v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025), Selis Tinoco v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. Petitioner may file a Reply on or before 1/12/2026. If Petitioner has not already served a copy of the Petition and Motion by email to the U.S. Attorney's Office at their email address (usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov), Petitioner's Counsel shall do so by no later than 12:00 PM on 1/7/2026. The matter is not set for a hearing though the court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 01/07/2026)

Jan 07, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings

#6

Jan 08, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Attorney Katherine Theresa Lydon, GOVT added for All Respondents. (Lydon, Katherine) Modified on 1/12/2026 (KS). (Entered: 01/08/2026)

#7

Jan 08, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#8

Jan 08, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/8/2026: In Respondents' 7 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents contend that Petitioner's detention is lawful under the Constitution and applicable provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. However, Respondents acknowledge the caselaw from this court in Labrador-Prato v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025) and Selis Tinoco v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), and acknowledge that "[t]his case is not substantively distinguishable" from those cases. (Doc. No. 7 at 1.) Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Labrador-Prato and Selis Tinoco, Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Petitioner shall be released immediately from Respondents' custody; (2) Respondents shall not impose any additional restriction on him, such as electronic monitoring, unless that is determined to be necessary at a future pre-deprivation/custody hearing; and (3) If the Government seeks to re-detain Petitioner, it must provide no less than 7 days' notice to Petitioner and must hold a pre-deprivation bond hearing before a neutral arbiter pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its implementing regulations, at which Petitioner's eligibility for bond must be considered. Moreover, in light of Respondents' non-opposition to treating Petitioner's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order as a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (See Doc. No. 7 at 1), and given that the standard for issuing a Temporary Restraining Order is "substantially identical" to the standard for issuing a Preliminary Injunction, Stuhlbarg Intl Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001), the court hereby ISSUES a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms. This case is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 01/08/2026)

Jan 08, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings