Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-00920

#1

Feb 03, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Ajay None. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12848139) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Shen, Mitchell) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#2

Feb 03, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Ajay None. (Shen, Mitchell) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#3

Feb 03, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/9/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk SSA) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#4

Feb 03, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Pam Bondi,Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut,Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Polly Kaiser,Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Todd Lyons,Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Yu, Jonathan) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#5

Feb 03, 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. (Anonymous) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#6

Feb 03, 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. (Anonymous) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#7

Feb 03, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/3/2026: Pending the issuance of the court's 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, 2/4/2026, 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 Thursday, 2/5/2026, at 5:00 PM. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decisions in Perez v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01540-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3187578 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2025), O.A.C.S. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01652-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3485221 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. Furthermore, respondents are directed to indicate in their opposition whether they oppose converting the motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties' proposal. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

#8

Feb 03, 2026

NOTICE of Proof of Service by Ajay None re 7 Minute Order,,,,,,,,,. (Shen, Mitchell) (Entered: 02/03/2026)

Feb 03, 2026

Minute Order

#9

Feb 05, 2026

RESPONSE by Pam Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Polly Kaiser, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem to 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 7 Minute Order,,,,,,,,,. (Yu, Jonathan) (Entered: 02/05/2026)

#10

Feb 05, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/5/2026: (Text Only Entry); GRANTING 2 Motion for TRO. On 2/3/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order wherein petitioner alleges that he has resided in the United States since June 2024, after his initial entry ICE determined he was not a flight risk and released him into the United States, and he was then re-detained without explanation on 1/16/2026 near his home. (Doc. No. 2 at 5-6.) On 2/3/2026, the court set a briefing schedule on petitioner's pending motion and ordered respondents to substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decisions in Perez v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01540-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3187578 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2025) and O.A.C.S. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01652-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3485221 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025). (Doc. No. 7.) In respondents' opposition (Doc. No. 9 ) to petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ), respondents concede that "there are no substantial factual or legal issues that render this case distinguishable from this Court's prior decisions in" Perez and O.A.C.S. (Doc. No. 9 at 1.) Respondents also state that they do not oppose treating the temporary restraining order as a motion for preliminary injunction. (Id.) Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning as stated in Perez and O.A.C.S., petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ) is CONVERTED into a motion for preliminary injunction and is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release petitioner from respondents' custody on the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his 1/16/2026 re-detention; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner for any purpose, absent exigent circumstances, without providing petitioner notice and a pre-detention hearing before an immigration judge where respondents will have the burden to demonstrate a change in circumstances justifying petitioner's re-detention. 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 petition for habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ) is referred to Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk APM) (Entered: 02/05/2026)

Feb 05, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#11

Feb 09, 2026

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