Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01252

#1

Feb 12, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Shiv Vig by Shiv Vig. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 3 NTA, # 4 Bond Denial Order, # 5 I-589 Receipt Notice, # 6 Biometrics Stamped Copy, # 7 Criminal History)(Gill, Bhupinder) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#2

Feb 12, 2026

EXHIBIT Civil Cover Sheet by Shiv Vig re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,. (Gill, Bhupinder) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#3

Feb 12, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/19/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk WAK) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#4

Feb 12, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Anthony Andrews for Sergio Albarran,Anthony Andrews for Pamela Bondi,Anthony Andrews for Christopher Chestnut,Anthony Andrews for Todd M. Lyons,Anthony Andrews for Kristi Noem (Andrews, Anthony) (Entered: 02/12/2026)

#5

Feb 12, 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: 02/12/2026)

#6

Feb 12, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#7

Feb 12, 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: 02/12/2026)

Feb 12, 2026

PAYMENT for habeas petition filing fee in the amount of $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12897611. (Gill, Bhupinder)

#8

Feb 13, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/13/2026: Pending the issuance of the court's order resolving the pending 6 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 6 motion for temporary restraining order. Counsel for respondents have already entered Notices of Appearance. Respondents shall file a written opposition to the pending 6 motion for temporary restraining order by Tuesday, 2/17/2026, at 5 PM. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address the impact of the court's decision in Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-cv-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3713987 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025) on this action, in particular whether petitioner is a member of the "Bond Eligible Class" certified in that order. 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: 02/13/2026)

Feb 13, 2026

Minute Order

#9

Feb 17, 2026

RESPONSE by Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem to 6 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 8 Minute Order,,,,,,. (Andrews, Anthony) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#10

Feb 20, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/20/2026: On 2/12/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order contending that he is a member of the Bond Eligible Class that was certified in Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz, No. 5:25-cv-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3713987, at *32 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025), judgment entered sub nom. Maldonado Bautista v. Noem, No. 5:25-cv-01873-SSS-BFM, 2025 WL 3678485 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2025). (Doc. No. 6 .) On 2/17/2026, respondents filed an opposition to the motion in which they argue that petitioner is not a member of the Bond Eligible Class because petitioner is an applicant for admission who was never admitted into the United States and he is therefore detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1). (Doc. No. 9 at 2-5.) Respondents also do not oppose converting the motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction. (Id. at 1.) Petitioner entered the United States without inspection in 8/2022 and resided in Northern California until he was re-detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement on or about 1/1/2026. Because petitioner had been continuously residing in the United States since his arrival in the United States in 8/2022 until he was detained by immigration officials on 1/1/2026, the court rejects the contention that petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(1). Diaz v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-00066-JLT-CDB (HC), 2026 WL 323257, at *7 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 6, 2026) (concluding that § 1225(b) did not apply to petitioners who were detained after being present in the United States and where the government failed to establish that they were not physically present in the United States continuously for two years prior to the date they were deemed inadmissible). Moreover, petitioner is not subject to a final order of removal, nor have respondents argued or provided any authority to indicate that petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under § 1226(c). Accordingly, having considered the circumstances surrounding petitioner's detention and the parties' arguments, the court concludes that petitioner is a member of the Maldonado Bautista Bond Eligible Class, CONVERTS the motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction, and GRANTS it as follows: (1) Respondents are ORDERED to provide petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to § 1226(a) within ten (10) days from the date of entry of this order; (2) Within three days of the bond hearing, respondents shall file a status report in this case confirming that petitioner has been provided the bond hearing; and (3) Petitioner's request for a temporary restraining order requiring respondents to immediately release petitioner from respondents' custody is DENIED without prejudice. Under the circumstances of the case, petitioner will not be required to post bond pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ) is referred to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JRW) (Entered: 02/20/2026)

Feb 20, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO