Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00182

#1

Jan 12, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem by Gurmeet Kumar. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12747098) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil cover sheet, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed order, # 3 Exhibit I765 approval notice, # 4 Exhibit Denied bond order, # 5 Exhibit I589, # 6 Exhibit NTA, # 7 Exhibit Biometrics stamped copy, # 8 Character Reference Letters Character reference letter)(Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

#2

Jan 12, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Gurmeet Kumar. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 2 Points and Authorities Memo-Points and Authorities)(Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

#3

Jan 12, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 2/17/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk EF) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

#4

Jan 12, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/12/2026: 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 tomorrow, 1/13/2026, by 12:00 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 12:00 PM on Wednesday, 1/14/2026. An initial review of the petition reveals that petitioner may be part of the Bond Eligible Class certified in Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-cv-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3713987 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025). Accordingly, in their opposition respondents shall substantively address the impact of the court's decision in Bautista on this action, in particular whether petitioner is a member of the "Bond Eligible Class" certified in that order. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties proposal. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 01/12/2026)

Jan 12, 2026

Minute Order

#5

Jan 13, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#6

Jan 13, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#7

Jan 13, 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: 01/13/2026)

#8

Jan 14, 2026

RESPONSE by Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem to 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 4 Minute Order,,,,,,,,. Attorney Lee, Justin added. (Lee, Justin) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

#9

Jan 15, 2026

REPLY by Gurmeet Kumar re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 4 Minute Order,,,,,,,, 8 Response. (Gahra, Manpreet) (Entered: 01/15/2026)

#10

Jan 15, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/15/2026: On 1/12/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order. (Doc. No. 2 .) On 1/14/2026, respondents filed their opposition (Doc. No. 6 ) to the motion. Having considered the circumstances of petitioners current detention and the parties arguments, the court finds analogous and persuasive the undersigneds previous order in Rocha Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01755-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025), where the court concluded that the petitioner was likely to succeed on the merits of his due process claim because he had demonstrated a liberty interest in his continued release, and his detention without written notice and a hearing was likely unlawful. Here petitioner was previously released on parole by immigration authorities and was not provided with written notice regarding the reason for his recent re-detention at the time of that re-detention. (Doc. No. 1 at 8, 12.) Accordingly, for the reasons previously stated by this court in Rocha Chavarria, 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 July 26, 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: 01/15/2026)

Jan 15, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO