Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01657

#1

Feb 27, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Sukhwinder Das. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12969483) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ghuman, Daljit) (Entered: 02/27/2026)

#2

Feb 27, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 4/2/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk MCF) (Entered: 02/27/2026)

#3

Mar 02, 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: 03/02/2026)

#4

Mar 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 3/2/2026: (Text Only Entry). The Court has reviewed petitioner's 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus. The Court has addressed the legal issues raised by the 1 petition on previous occasions. See e.g., J.S.H.M. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01309-JLT-SKO (HC) (E.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2025); Ortiz Donis v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-CV-01228-JLT-SAB (HC), 2025 WL 32879514 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 9, 2025); M.R.R. v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-CV-01517-JLT (HC), 2025 WL 3265446 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2025). On or before March 6, 2026, respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that render it distinguishable from the Court's prior orders in J.S.H.M. v. Wofford, Ortiz Donis v. Chestnut, and M.M.R. v. Chestnut and justify denying the petition, or indicate the matter is not substantively distinguishable. By March 3, 2026, to the extent not already accomplished, petitioner's counsel is directed: (1) to serve respondents with a copy of the petition, the accompanying papers, and a copy of this Order, by e-mail to all appropriate recipients including the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California, with a copy to usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov, and by overnight mail; and (2) promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter notices of appearance. Pending the Court's decision, and unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Court ORDERS that respondents shall not transfer petitioner out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction"). (Deputy Clerk WAK) (Entered: 03/02/2026)

Mar 02, 2026

Minute Order

#5

Mar 04, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#6

Mar 04, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Sukhwinder Das. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Declaration of Counsel)(Ghuman, Daljit) (Entered: 03/04/2026)

#7

Mar 05, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Entry Only) The Court has reviewed the Petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) and the related request for emergency injunctive relief (Doc. 6). Petitioner suggests, though his motion is vague, that he has been detained since October 2025 (Doc. 6 at 5), about 5 months ago. He offers little to explain his significant delay in seeking his request for a temporary restraining order, and he offers no explanation as to why, despite this inordinate delay, the Court should treat the situation as an emergency. Thus, the TRO request is untimely, and it is DENIED. Local Rule 231(b). The Court refers the matter to the assigned magistrate judge for a determination on the merits. The Court sets the following briefing schedule, which may be modified by the magistrate judge as needed. Respondents SHALL file their responsive pleading within 30 days. Petitioner may file a traverse no later than 15 days after the respondents file their brief.In the meantime, unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Court ORDERS that Respondents shall not remove Petitioner from the United States nor transfer Petitioner out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting 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 circumstances, the Court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and any subsequent order and finds that Petitioner has satisfied the factors governing the issuance of such relief signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on March 5, 2026. (Deputy Clerk IM) (Entered: 03/05/2026)

Mar 05, 2026

Order on Motion for TRO

Mar 23, 2026

Order Reassigning Case

#9

Apr 03, 2026

Answer to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus