Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00705

#1

Jan 27, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Ron Murray, Kristi Noem by Pasang Sherpa. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12815822) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Adhikari, Laxman) (Entered: 01/27/2026)

#2

Jan 27, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#3

Jan 27, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/2/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk LAO) (Entered: 01/27/2026)

#4

Jan 27, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/27/2026: 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 by 12:00 PM on 1/30/2026. 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 2/2/2026. 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 1/28/2026. 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: 01/27/2026)

#5

Jan 27, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Arelis M. Clemente, GOVT for Pamela Bondi,Arelis M. Clemente, GOVT for Todd Lyons,Arelis M. Clemente, GOVT for Ron Murray,Arelis M. Clemente, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Clemente, Arelis) (Entered: 01/27/2026)

Jan 27, 2026

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

#6

Jan 28, 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. (Clemente, Arelis) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

#7

Jan 28, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#8

Jan 28, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 1/28/2026: In Respondents' 7 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents do not identify any provision of law or fact in this case that would substantively distinguish it from this court's decision 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). Indeed, Respondents concede that this case is not substantively distinguishable. (See Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Labrador-Prato and Selis Tinoco, Petitioner's 2 Motion for 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. Further, Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by no later than 2/4/2026, as to why this court should not issue a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms as this Order. Petitioner may file a response thereto by no later than 2/6/2026. Respondents may file a reply to Petitioner's response by no later than 2/9/2026. If the parties agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties' proposal. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 01/28/2026)

Jan 28, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

#9

Feb 03, 2026

RESPONSE to 8 ORDER to SHOW CAUSE by Pamela Bondi, Todd Lyons, Ron Murray, Kristi Noem. (Clemente, Arelis) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#10

Feb 04, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by Relief Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 2/4/2026: On 1/28/2026, the court issued an 8 Order granting Petitioner's 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and requiring Respondents to show cause why the court should not issue a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms as the Temporary Restraining Order. On 2/3/2026, Respondents filed a 9 Response to the Order to Show Cause, stating that they have nothing further to add to the arguments raised in their Opposition to the Temporary Restraining Order. 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). Therefore, for the same reasons as those stated in the 8 Order granting a Temporary Restraining Order, the court finds Petitioner has sufficiently shown that all four Winter factors weigh in favor of granting injunctive relief. Accordingly, the court hereby ISSUES a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms as the 8 Temporary Restraining Order and REFERS this matter to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk RAA) (Entered: 02/04/2026)

Feb 04, 2026

Minute Order AND Preliminary Injunction