Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00511

#1

Jan 21, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Moises Becerra, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem by Sanjar Faizi. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12789520) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#2

Jan 21, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Sanjar Faizi. (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibits, # 4 Declaration, # 5 TRO Checklist, # 6 TRO Proposed Order, # 7 PI Proposed Order)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#3

Jan 21, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 2/23/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk OFR) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#4

Jan 21, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Moises Becerra,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Pamela Bondi,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#5

Jan 21, 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. (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#6

Jan 21, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/21/2026: 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 1/23/2026. 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, 2026 WL 25511 (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 1/26/2026. 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 1/22/2026. 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: 01/21/2026)

Jan 21, 2026

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

#7

Jan 22, 2026

RESPONSE by Moises Becerra, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem to 6 Minute Order,,,,,, Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings,,,,,. (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 01/22/2026)

#8

Jan 22, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#9

Jan 23, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/23/2026: In Respondents' 7 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents contend that Petitioner is subject to detention under the Constitution and applicable provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. However, 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 case is not distinguishable from those cases. 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 the Respondents' custody with the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his re-detention; (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 seven (7) days' notice to Petitioner and must hold a pre-deprivation bond hearing before a neutral arbiter, 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 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: 01/23/2026)

Jan 23, 2026

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

#10

Jan 26, 2026

REPLY by Sanjar Faizi re 7 Response, 6 Minute Order,,,,,, Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings,,,,,. (Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 01/26/2026)

#11

Jan 26, 2026

06 - HC/Order Requiring Respondent to File a Response