Eastern District of California • 2:26-cv-00764

#1

Mar 09, 2026

2241 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Warden, California City Correctional Center by Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Deputy Clerk VLK) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#2

Mar 09, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Deputy Clerk VLK) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

Mar 09, 2026

RECEIPT number 200017573 for $5.00 for Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Deputy Clerk LMS)

#3

Mar 10, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 4/13/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk VLK) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#4

Mar 10, 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: 03/10/2026)

#5

Mar 10, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/10/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. The court has previously addressed the legal issues raised by Count Two of the Petition. See e.g., Alvarez Maciel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-01318-DC-CKD, 2026 WL 496948 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2026), and Barajas Ortiz v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-01167-DC-SCR, Doc. No. 11 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2026). 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 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 12:00 PM on 3/13/2026. 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 3/26/2026. Both parties should address whether they oppose the court ruling directly on the Petition, albeit as to Count Two 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: 03/10/2026)

Mar 10, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 3 Prisoner New Case Documents served on Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Deputy Clerk VLK)

Mar 10, 2026

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

Mar 10, 2026

Service by Mail

Mar 10, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 5, served on Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

#6

Mar 13, 2026

RESPONSE by Warden, California City Correctional Center to 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. (McDonald, Tracey) (Entered: 03/13/2026)

#7

Mar 13, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/13/2026: Having considered Respondents' 6 Response, the court hereby DIRECTS Respondents to file a further response, by no later than 3/16/2026, specifically to substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that materially distinguish it from the court's prior orders listed in the court's 3/10/2026 5 Order. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 03/13/2026)

Mar 13, 2026

Service by Mail

Mar 13, 2026

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

Mar 13, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 7, served on Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

#8

Mar 16, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#9

Mar 16, 2026

EXHIBIT 1 in support of Supplemental Opposition by Warden, California City Correctional Center re 8 Opposition to Motion. (McDonald, Tracey) (Entered: 03/16/2026)

#10

Mar 17, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/17/2026: In Respondents' 8 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents continue to oppose issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. However, Respondents do not identify any material distinction between this case and the court's previous decisions in Alvarez Maciel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-01318-DC-CKD, 2026 WL 496948 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2026), and Barajas Ortiz v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-01167-DC-SCR, Doc. No. 11 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2026), and other cases addressing the same issue presented here. Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning in Alvarez Maciel and Barajas Ortiz, Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Petitioner shall be released immediately from the Respondents' custody; and (2) should Respondents attempt to re-detain Petitioner, they shall provide him with a bond hearing pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 1236.1(c)(8) at which Petitioner shall bear the burden of showing that he is not a flight risk or a risk to community safety. This Order does not address the circumstances in which Respondents may detain Petitioner in the event Petitioner becomes subject to an executable final order of removal and Petitioner receives notice of that final order of removal. Moreover, in light of Respondents' non-opposition to treating Petitioner's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order as a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (see Doc. No. 8), and 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. Upon further review, the court will not rule directly on the Petition at this time. Therefore, this case is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 03/17/2026)

Mar 17, 2026

Service by Mail

Mar 17, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 10, served on Jose Rene Cruz-Chicas. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

Mar 17, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings