Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01211
(HC) Singh v. California City Correctional Facility
Active
Case Information
Filed: February 11, 2026
Assigned to:
Dena M. Coggins
Referred to:
Carolyn K. Delaney
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause:
28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Active
Last Activity:
February 19, 2026
Parties:
View All Parties →
Docket Entries
#1
Feb 11, 2026
PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Mandeep Singh. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12892670) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rozdzielski, Jennifer) (Entered: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#2
Feb 11, 2026
PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Mandeep Singh for attorney Mohammad Akif Saleem to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 300, receipt number ACAEDC-12892765) (Rozdzielski, Jennifer) (Entered: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
Application for Pro Hac Vice and Proposed Order
#3
Feb 11, 2026
DECLARATION of Jennifer Rozdzielski re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Rozdzielski, Jennifer) (Entered: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
DECLARATION
#4
Feb 11, 2026
PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/16/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk PAA) (Entered: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider
#5
Feb 11, 2026
DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Pamela Bondi,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for California City Correctional Facility,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Immigration and Customs Enforcement,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
DESIGNATION
#6
Feb 11, 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: 02/11/2026)
Main Document:
CONSENT/DECLINE
#7
Feb 13, 2026
MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Chief Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/13/2026: Counsel for Petitioner's 2 Pro Hac Vice Application is GRANTED. Respondent is directed to file a response to the pending 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus within 7 (seven) days. Respondent shall include with the response any and all transcripts or other documents relevant to the determination of the issues presented in the Petition. Petitioner may file a reply within 7 (seven) days of the filing of the response. The Pro Hac Vice attorney is DIRECTED to request electronic filing access through PACER. (Text Only Entry). (Deputy Clerk LMK) (Entered: 02/13/2026)
Feb 13, 2026
Minute Order AND Order on Application for Pro Hac Vice AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings
#8
Feb 16, 2026
Ex Parte Application
Main Document:
Ex Parte Application
#9
Feb 17, 2026
MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 2/17/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 8 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 2/19/2026. 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, 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), Labrador-Prato v. Noem, 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025), and D.L.C. v. Wofford, 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 2/20/2026. 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: 02/17/2026)
#10
Feb 17, 2026
Certificate / Proof of Service
Main Document:
Certificate / Proof of Service
Feb 17, 2026
Minute Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings
#11
Feb 18, 2026
MOTION TO DISMISS 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Pamela Bondi, California City Correctional Facility, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Williams, Jonathan) (Docket Text Modified on 2/19/2026 by CRS.) (Entered: 02/18/2026)
Main Document:
Dismiss
#12
Feb 19, 2026
MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 2/19/2026: In Respondents' 11 Opposition to Petitioner's 8 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 decisions in Selis Tinoco v. Noem, 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), Labrador-Prato v. Noem, 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025), and D.L.C. v. Wofford, 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, 2026 WL 25511 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2026). Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in those cases, Petitioner's 8 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. This Order does not address the circumstances in which Respondents may detain Petitioner in the event Petitioner becomes subject to an executable Final Order of Removal and Petitioner receives notice of that Final Order of Removal. Moreover, in light of Respondents' filing a response addressing both the Motion and the Petition, (See Doc. No. 8 at 2), 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: 02/19/2026)
Feb 19, 2026
Minute Order AND Order on Ex Parte Application AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings
Parties
Party
Party
Attorney
Attorney
Attorney
Attorney
Firm