Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01529
(HC) Karan v. Chestnut
Active
Case Information
Filed: February 23, 2026
Assigned to:
Dale Alan Drozd
Referred to:
Allison Claire
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause:
8:1105(a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
Active
Last Activity:
February 27, 2026
Parties:
View All Parties →
Docket Entries
#1
Feb 23, 2026
PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Todd Lyons, Sergio Albarran, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem by Karan Karan. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12944801) (Attachments: # 1 COVER, # 2 EVIDENCE)(Kaur, Simranjit) (Entered: 02/23/2026)
Main Document:
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#2
Feb 23, 2026
MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Karan Karan. (Attachments: # 1 EVIDENCE, # 2 TRO CHECKLIST, # 3 ATTORNEY DEC)(Kaur, Simranjit) (Entered: 02/23/2026)
Main Document:
Temporary Restraining Order
#3
Feb 23, 2026
PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 3/30/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk MCF) (Entered: 02/23/2026)
Main Document:
Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider
#4
Feb 23, 2026
MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/23/26: 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, 2/24/2026, 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 5:00 PM on Wednesday, 2/25/2026. 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 Perez v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01540-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3187578 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2025) or Rocha Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-CV-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 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 JRM) (Entered: 02/23/2026)
#5
Feb 23, 2026
DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Haddy Abouzeid, GOVT for Todd Lyons,Haddy Abouzeid, GOVT for Sergio Albarran,Haddy Abouzeid, GOVT for Pamela Bondi,Haddy Abouzeid, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut,Haddy Abouzeid, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Abouzeid, Haddy) (Entered: 02/23/2026)
Main Document:
DESIGNATION
#6
Feb 23, 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: 02/23/2026)
Main Document:
CONSENT/DECLINE
Feb 23, 2026
Minute Order
#7
Feb 25, 2026
Opposition to Motion
Main Document:
Opposition to Motion
#8
Feb 26, 2026
MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 02/26/2026: On 2/23/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order in which he alleges that he entered the United States on 10/15/2024, was subsequently released on 11/19/2024, and on 11/12/2025 he was arrested by immigration authorities while attending a scheduled in-person check-in without any warning, paperwork, or legitimate reason. (Doc. No. 2 at 10-11.) Also on 2/23/2026, 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 the situations addressed by 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) or Rocha Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025). (Doc. No. 4.) In their opposition (Doc. No. 7 ), respondents concede that "that this matter is not substantively distinguishable from the Court's prior precedent." (Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Respondents also state they do not oppose conversion of the motion for temporary restraining order to a motion for preliminary injunction and do not request a hearing. (Id.) Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning as set forth in Perez and Rocha Chavarria, 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 11/12/2025 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 of demonstrating 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 Allison Claire for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk JRM) (Entered: 02/26/2026)
Feb 26, 2026
Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO
Feb 27, 2026
Minute Order
Parties
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Party
Attorney
Attorney
Attorney
Firm