Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01843

#1

Mar 06, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Sergio Albarran, Pam Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem by David Rojas Tellez. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13001565) (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Kelsey Morales with Exhibits, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Morales, Kelsey) (Entered: 03/06/2026)

#2

Mar 06, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 4/9/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk MCF) (Entered: 03/06/2026)

#3

Mar 07, 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: 03/07/2026)

#4

Mar 11, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#5

Mar 12, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/12/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 4 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. The court has previously addressed the legal issues raised by Count One of the Petition. See, e.g., Hoac v. Becerra, No. 2:25-cv-01740-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 1993771 (E.D. Cal. July 16, 2025), Vuong v. Becerra, 1:25-cv-01847-DC-CSK, 2025 WL 3707172 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2025), and El-Ghazaly v. Chestnut, 1:25-cv-01621-DC-CKD, 2025 WL 3485030 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025). The court is contemplating ruling directly on the 1 Petition, with the understanding that the court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in support of the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2) ("Before or after beginning the hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction, the court may advance the trial on the merits and consolidate it with the hearing."); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2243 ("The court shall summarily hear and determine the facts, and dispose of [a petitioner's habeas petition] as law and justice require."); A.R. v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-00551-KES-SAB, 2026 WL 227112, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2026) (considering preliminary injunction and merits of habeas petition simultaneously). Respondents shall file an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to the 4 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 12:00 PM on 3/17/2026. In their response, Respondents shall substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that materially distinguish it from the court's prior orders listed above. Petitioner may file a Reply by 12:00 PM on 3/18/2026. Both parties should address whether they oppose the court ruling directly on the Petition, albeit as to Count One only, to the extent a ruling on that Count entitles Petitioner to the relief sought in the Petition. The matter is not set for a hearing though the court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 03/12/2026)

Mar 12, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings

#6

Mar 17, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#7

Mar 18, 2026

REPLY by David Rojas Tellez re 6 Opposition to Motion. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Kelsey Morales with Exhibit)(Morales, Kelsey) (Entered: 03/18/2026)

#8

Apr 03, 2026

**DISREGARD SEE ECF NO. 9 ** MINUTE ORDER issued by the Relief Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 4/3/2026: In Respondents' 6 Opposition to Petitioner's 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents continue to oppose the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. Respondents aver that the legal analysis in the decisions from this court in Hoac v. Becerra, No. 2:25-cv-01740-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 1993771 (E.D. Cal. July 16, 2025), Vuong v. Becerra, 1:25-cv-01847-DC-CSK, 2025 WL 3707172 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2025), and El-Ghazaly v. Chestnut, 1:25-cv-01621-DC-CKD, 2025 WL 3485030 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025) are not applicable to this case because Petitioner is mandatorily detained under section 1226(c) due to his 2007 conviction for drug possession in violation of Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11351. (Doc. No. 6 at 1-2.) The court finds this argument unavailing for two reasons. First, in 2014, Petitioner was released on an Order of Supervision ("OSUP") pursuant to a reinstated final order of removal. (Doc. No. 6 at 1.) Second, Petitioner's conviction was vacated by the Alameda County Superior Court on 3/4/2025, pursuant to Cal. Penal Code § 1473.7(a)(1). (Doc. No. 1 at 22.) Despite Respondents' arguments that there are material factual differences between this case and those identified by the court, Respondents must still comply with the applicable regulations regarding revocation of an OSUP and re-detention to effectuate removal. See Hoac, 2025 WL 1993771 at *4. Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Hoac, Vuong, and El-Ghazaly, Petitioner's 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner from Respondents' custody; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include, at a minimum, strict compliance with the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i). Moreover, given that the standard for issuing a Temporary Restraining Order is "substantially identical" to the standard for issuing a Preliminary Injunction, Stuhlbarg Int'l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001), the court hereby ISSUES a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms. This case is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk RAA) Modified on 4/3/2026 (RAA). (Entered: 04/03/2026)

#9

Apr 03, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by Relief Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 4/3/2026: In Respondents' 6 Opposition to Petitioner's 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents continue to oppose the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. Respondents aver that the legal analysis in the decisions from this court in Hoac v. Becerra, No. 2:25-cv-01740-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 1993771 (E.D. Cal. July 16, 2025), Vuong v. Becerra, 1:25-cv-01847-DC-CSK, 2025 WL 3707172 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 22, 2025), and El-Ghazaly v. Chestnut, 1:25-cv-01621-DC-CKD, 2025 WL 3485030 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025) are not applicable to this case because Petitioner is mandatorily detained under section 1226(c) due to his 2007 conviction for drug possession in violation of Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11351. (Doc. No. 6 at 1-2.) The court finds this argument unavailing for two reasons. First, in 2014, Petitioner was released on an Order of Supervision ("OSUP") pursuant to a reinstated final order of removal. (Doc. No. 6 at 1.) Second, Petitioner's conviction was vacated by the Alameda County Superior Court on 3/4/2025, pursuant to Cal. Penal Code § 1473.7(a)(1). (Doc. No. 1 at 22.) Despite Respondents' arguments that there are material factual differences between this case and those identified by the court, Respondents must still comply with the applicable regulations regarding revocation of an OSUP and re-detention to effectuate removal. See Hoac, 2025 WL 1993771 at *4. Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Hoac, Vuong, and El-Ghazaly, Petitioner's 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Respondents shall immediately release Petitioner David Rojas Tellez (A-008 448 819) from Respondents' custody; and (2) Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include, at a minimum, strict compliance with the requirements of 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(i). Moreover, given that the standard for issuing a Temporary Restraining Order is "substantially identical" to the standard for issuing a Preliminary Injunction, Stuhlbarg Int'l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001), the court hereby ISSUES a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve California City Detention Center with a copy of this order. This case is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk RAA) (Entered: 04/03/2026)

Apr 03, 2026

Minute Order

Apr 03, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#10

Apr 06, 2026

Minute Order

#11

May 07, 2026

Answer to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus