Eastern District of California • 2:26-cv-00597

#1

Feb 26, 2026

2241 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS and REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against all Respondents by Lam Thanh Dang. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Deputy Clerk LMS) (Entered: 02/26/2026)

#2

Feb 26, 2026

EX PARTE MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Lam Thanh Dang. (Deputy Clerk LMS) (Entered: 02/26/2026)

#3

Feb 26, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 4/2/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk LMS) (Entered: 02/26/2026)

#4

Feb 26, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 02/26/2026: 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 court's 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, in light of petitioner's pro se status, no later than tomorrow, 2/27/2026, by 5:00 PM, the Clerk of the Court 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 Attorney's 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 Monday, 3/2/2026. 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 N.D.N. v. Bondi, No. 1:25-cv-01587-DAD-CKD, 2025 WL 3251102 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025), Quan v. Bowen, No. 5:25-cv-02546-HDV-PVC, 2025 WL 3691858 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 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: 02/26/2026)

#5

Feb 26, 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: 02/26/2026)

Feb 26, 2026

Service by Mail

Feb 26, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 4 Minute Order served on Lam Thanh Dang. (Deputy Clerk JRM)

Feb 26, 2026

SERVICE IN PERSON AT THE COUNTER on Montana Skylar Hull re 3 Prisoner New Case Documents for Lam Thanh Dang. (Deputy Clerk LMS)

Feb 26, 2026

RECEIPT number 200017268 for $5.00 for Lam Thanh Dang from Montana Skylar Hull. (Deputy Clerk LMS)

Feb 26, 2026

Minute Order

#6

Mar 02, 2026

Dismiss

#7

Mar 02, 2026

Answer to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

#8

Mar 03, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/3/2026: On 2/26/2026, petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for temporary restraining order seeking his immediate release from respondents' custody. (Doc. No. 2 .) On 3/2/2026, respondents filed an opposition to the pending motion. (Doc. No. 7 .) They argue therein that petitioner is subject to a final order of removal and that, while he has been detained longer than the presumptively reasonable 6-month period in post-removal proceedings, his removal to Vietnam is likely to occur in the next few months because respondents are "currently just waiting for Vietnam to issue the travel documents in order to schedule removal." (Id. at 2.) However, respondents do not represent that Vietnam has confirmed that it will issue travel documents for petitioner and there is no evidence before the court suggesting as much. In addition, respondents do not oppose converting the motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction. (Id. at 1 .) Having considered the circumstances of petitioner's detention and the parties' arguments, the court finds persuasive its prior order in Artemenko v. Warden of Golden State Annex Ice Det. Facility, No. 1:25-cv-01943-DAD-AC, 2026 WL 523670 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2026) where the court held that the petitioner who was detained for more than six months during the post-removal period was entitled to be immediately released because the government's general representations about requested travel documents remaining pending with the country of removal was insufficient to carry its burden of establishing that petitioner's removal was reasonably foreseeable. Here, respondents have conceded that petitioner has been detained in post-removal proceedings longer than the presumptively reasonable 6-month period. Nonetheless, respondents merely indicate that they "are informed and believe that Vietnam will issue Petitioner's travel documents within the next few months." (Doc. No. 7 at 4.) Moreover, respondents provide no factual basis for their stated belief that travel documents will issue soon. These vague representations are insufficient to sustain respondents' burden. Accordingly, the court CONVERTS petitioner's motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction and GRANTS it as follows: (1) Respondents are ORDERED to immediately release petitioner from custody; 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. 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 writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ) is referred to Magistrate Judge Chi Soo Kim for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 03/03/2026)

Mar 03, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

Mar 03, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 8 Minute Order served on Lam Thanh Dang. (Deputy Clerk PAB)

Mar 03, 2026

Service by Mail

#9

Mar 06, 2026

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

Mar 06, 2026

Service by Mail

Mar 16, 2026

Service by Mail