Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00275

#1

Jan 14, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem by Gurpreet Rattu. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12757316) (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Kaur, Gurpreet) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

#2

Jan 14, 2026

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Gurpreet Rattu. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum, # 2 Notice, # 3 Proposed Order)(Kaur, Gurpreet) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

#3

Jan 14, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 2/17/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

#4

Jan 14, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/14/2026: 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 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on or before 1/16/2026. 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 Selis Tinoco v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), D.L.C. v. Wofford, et al., 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, Order, Doc. No. 12 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2026), 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 1/20/2026. 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 5:00 PM on 1/14/2026. 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: 01/14/2026)

#5

Jan 14, 2026

CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by Gurpreet Rattu re 4 Minute Order,,,,,, Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings,,,,,. (Kaur, Gurpreet) (Entered: 01/14/2026)

Jan 14, 2026

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

#6

Jan 16, 2026

(DISREGARD; DOCUMENT FILED IN THIS CASE IN ERROR.) DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. (Yu, Jonathan) (Docket Text Modified on 1/20/2026 by CRS.) (Entered: 01/16/2026)

#7

Jan 16, 2026

Appoint Counsel

#8

Jan 16, 2026

OPPOSITION by Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem to Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction; REQUEST for Extension of time to Respond to the Petition. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 1/20/2026 (KLY). (Entered: 01/16/2026)

#9

Jan 20, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/20/2026: In Respondents' 8 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents acknowledge the decisions from this court in Selis Tinoco v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025) and D.L.C. v. Wofford, et al., 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, 2026 WL 25511 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2026), and acknowledge that this matter is not substantively distinguishable from those cases. Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Selis Tinoco and D.L.C., Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Petitioner shall be released immediately from the 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. 8 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 Int'l 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: 01/20/2026)

Jan 20, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#10

Jan 21, 2026

06 - HC/Order Requiring Respondent to File a Response