Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00154

#1

Jan 09, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem by Jaswinder Singh. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12743356) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil cover sheet, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit NTA, Order of Release, I589)(Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/09/2026)

#2

Jan 09, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Jaswinder Singh. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 2 Points and Authorities Memo-Points and Authorities)(Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/09/2026)

#3

Jan 09, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED: Consent or Decline due by 2/12/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk AML) (Entered: 01/09/2026)

#4

Jan 09, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/9/2026: Pending the issuance of the courts 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 Monday, 1/12/2026, 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 Tuesday, 1/13/2026. 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 Rangel v. Noem, et al., 1:26-cv-00084-DAD-CSK (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2026), Doc. No. 8, 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 RAA) (Entered: 01/09/2026)

Jan 09, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

#5

Jan 12, 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. (Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

#6

Jan 12, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#7

Jan 12, 2026

RESPONSE by Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 4 Minute Order,,,,,,,,, Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings,,,,,,,, 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Attorney Campbell, Charles added. (Campbell, Charles) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

#8

Jan 14, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/14/2026: On 1/9/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ). On 1/12/2026, respondents filed their opposition (Doc. No. 7 ) to the motion. Having considered the circumstances of petitioners current detention and the parties arguments, the court finds analogous and persuasive the undersigneds previous orders in Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025), where the court concluded that due process required a pre-detention hearing to protect the petitioners liberty interest in their continued release, and O.A.C.S. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01652-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3485221 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025), in which the court concluded that previously releasing the petitioner on his own recognizance created a reliance interest such that the petitioner was entitled to the due process available under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). Here, as in Ayala Cajina and O.A.C.S., petitioner previously encountered immigration authorities, was detained by those authorities, and later released on his own recognizance. (Doc. No. 1 at 89.) Accordingly, pursuant to the reasoning in Ayala Cajina and O.A.C.S., 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 that governed his release immediately prior to his detention on December 5, 2025; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner for any purpose, absent exigent circumstances, without providing petitioner written notice and a pre-detention hearing before a neutral adjudicator. 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 PAB) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

Jan 14, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#11

Jan 22, 2026

Preliminary Injunction