Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01341

#1

Feb 16, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Pam Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Nancy Gonzalez, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem by Eliseo Ramirez Pacheco. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12910888) (Brewer, Megan) (Entered: 02/16/2026)

#2

Feb 16, 2026

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Eliseo Ramirez Pacheco. (Brewer, Megan) (Entered: 02/16/2026)

#3

Feb 16, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Eliseo Ramirez Pacheco. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Proposed Order)(Brewer, Megan) (Entered: 02/16/2026)

#4

Feb 17, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/23/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk RRB) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#6

Feb 17, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Pam Bondi,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Nancy Gonzalez,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Todd Lyons,Jonathan Williams, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#7

Feb 17, 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: 02/17/2026)

#8

Feb 17, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/17/2026: Pending the issuance of the court's order resolving the pending 3 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 3 motion for temporary restraining order. Respondents shall file a written opposition to the pending 3 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM tomorrow, 2/18/2026. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decision in Rangel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-00084-DAD-CSK, 2026 WL 73996 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2026), and other similar cases 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: 02/17/2026)

#9

Feb 17, 2026

RESPONSE by Pam Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Nancy Gonzalez, Todd Lyons, Kristi Noem to 8 Minute Order,,,,,,. (Williams, Jonathan) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

#10

Feb 17, 2026

REPLY by Eliseo Ramirez Pacheco re 9 Response. (Brewer, Megan) (Entered: 02/17/2026)

Feb 17, 2026

Minute Order

#11

Feb 19, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/19/2026: On 2/16/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order alleging that he entered the United States without inspection, and he was later detained on 12/29/2025 without justification or a hearing. (Doc. No. 3 at 10-11.) On 2/17/2026, the court set a briefing schedule and ordered respondents to "substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decision in Rangel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-00084-DAD-CSK, 2026 WL 73996 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2026)." (Doc. No. 8.) In respondents' opposition (Doc. No. 9 ) to petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 3 ), respondents "do not distinguish this case from this court's decision in Rangel [.]" (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 Rangel, petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 3 ) is CONVERTED into a motion for preliminary injunction and is GRANTED in part, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) respondents are ORDERED to provide petitioner with an individualized bond hearing before an immigration judge pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) within ten (10) days of the date of entry of this order and within three (3) days of that hearing filing notice with the court that such a hearing was held; and (2) petitioner's request for a temporary restraining order requiring respondents to immediately release him from confinement is DENIED without prejudice to its renewal if appropriate. 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 Chi Soo Kim for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 02/19/2026)

Feb 19, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#12

Feb 23, 2026

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

#13

Feb 23, 2026

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