Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01769

#1

Mar 04, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Moises Becerra, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem by Max Noel Asaah Azaomo Nkeangnang. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12990534) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 03/04/2026)

#2

Mar 04, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Max Noel Asaah Azaomo Nkeangnang. (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibits, # 4 Declaration, # 5 TRO Checklist, # 6 TRO Proposed Order, # 7 PI Proposed Order)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 03/04/2026)

#3

Mar 04, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 4/6/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 03/04/2026)

#4

Mar 04, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/4/2026: (Text Only Entry). 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, counsel for petitioner has indicated that counsel has served respondents with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers to the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov. Accordingly, counsel for respondents shall promptly enter Notices of Appearance and file a written opposition to the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order by tomorrow, 3/5/2026, at 5 PM. 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 Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 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. (Entered: 03/04/2026)

Mar 04, 2026

Minute Order