Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01895

#1

Mar 09, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Warden of the California City Detention Center by Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk KML) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#2

Mar 09, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk KML) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#3

Mar 09, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk KML) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#4

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 KML) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#5

Mar 10, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/10/2026: On 3/9/2026, petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for appointment of counsel. (Doc. No. 3 .) Having reviewed the motion and the pending habeas petition, the court concludes that the interests of justice require appointment of counsel for the petitioner in this matter. Accordingly, the court hereby GRANTS petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B); see also Weygandt v. Look, 718 F.2d 952, 954 (9th Cir. 1983) (noting that, in the habeas context, "the district court or magistrate may appoint counsel at any stage of the case if the interests of justice require[.]"). The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to serve the Federal Defender Habeas Unit with a copy of the petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ) and petitioner's motion for temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 .) Once counsel has been appointed for petitioner in this matter, appointed counsel shall file, as soon as is practicable, supplemental briefing regarding the appropriate remedy under the circumstances of this case. Further, in light of petitioner's pro se status, the Clerk of the Court is further DIRECTED to serve counsel for respondents with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and this order to the United States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov, by Wednesday, 3/11/2026 at 5 PM. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter a Notice of Appearance. Counsel for respondents shall file an opposition to any supplemental briefing filed by appointed counsel within two (2) days from the date that any such briefing is filed. (Deputy Clerk JRM) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

Mar 10, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel

Mar 10, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 5 Minute Order served on Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk JRM)

Mar 10, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 4 Prisoner New Case Documents served on Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk KML)

Mar 10, 2026

Service by Mail

#7

Mar 16, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Noa Oren for Dat Van Hoang (Oren, Noa) (Entered: 03/16/2026)

#8

Mar 17, 2026

Request

Mar 17, 2026

RECEIPT number 100007595 for the filing fee in the amount of $5.00 paid on 3/17/2026 by Dat Van Hoang. (Deputy Clerk CRM)

#9

Mar 19, 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: 03/19/2026)

#10

Mar 19, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/19/2026: On March 9, 2026, petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, motion to appoint counsel, and motion for temporary restraining order. (Doc. Nos. 1, 2, 3 .) The next day, the court granted petitioner's motion to appoint counsel and directed appointed counsel to file supplemental briefing regarding the appropriate remedy being sought in this case. (Doc. No. 5 .) On March 16, 2026, counsel was appointed for petitioner. (Doc. No. 7 .) On March 17, 2026, petitioner, with the assistance of counsel, filed supplemental briefing in which counsel indicated that they "contacted the immigration court in Adelanto, California to inquire about the specifics of Mr. Hoang's immigration case but the clerks refused to answer any questions since counsel represents him in a habeas proceeding and not immigration court." (Doc. No. 8 at 1.) A review of the docket in this case reveals that, despite being served with the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and the court's order issued on 3/10/2026, counsel for respondents has not yet appeared in this action. Accordingly, good cause appearing and pursuant to Rule 6 of the Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, (the "Habeas Rules"), the court DIRECTS respondents to produce petitioner's A-file to petitioner's counsel within 48 hours of entering a notice of appearance in this case. See Alma Martinez Cruz v. Todd Lyons, et al., No. 5:25-cv-02879-MCS-MBK, 2025 WL 4041924, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2025) (noting that Rule 1(b) of the Habeas Rules allows district courts to apply the Habeas Rules to 2241 proceedings). Further, counsel for petitioner is directed to file supplemental briefing addressing the appropriate remedy in this case within three (3) days from the date that respondents' counsel has produced to counsel petitioner's A-file. Counsel for respondents may file an opposition to petitioner's supplemental briefing within two (2) days from the date that supplemental briefing is filed. (Deputy Clerk JRM) (Entered: 03/19/2026)

Mar 19, 2026

Minute Order

#11

Mar 21, 2026

Reconsideration

#12

Mar 23, 2026

Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

#13

Mar 26, 2026

Answer to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

#14

Mar 31, 2026

Request

#15

Mar 31, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/31/2026: "On 3/21/2026, respondent filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's order (Doc. No. 10 ) directing respondent to produce petitioner's A-File to petitioner's counsel. (Doc. No. 11 .) In that motion, respondent represented that it had provided petitioner's counsel with the relevant portions of petitioner's A-File and that it believed the parties would reach a stipulation regarding a "narrowing of the Court's order." (Id. at 2 n.1.) The parties subsequently informed the court by email that they believed they would soon reach such a stipulation. On 3/31/2026, petitioner's counsel filed a request for additional discovery of petitioner's medical records held by respondent. (Doc. No. 14 .) On 3/23/2026, petitioner filed a first amended petition for writ of habeas corpus which asserted as a claim for relief that petitioner's detention has become indefinite and that release is therefore required under Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). (Doc. No. 12 .) On 3/26/2026, respondent filed its answer to the first amended petition. (Doc. No. 13 .) To efficiently resolve the pending motions, as well as petitioner's original motion for temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ) and his underlying first amended petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 12 ), the court hereby SETS a hearing on 4/2/2026 at 01:30 PM before District Judge Dale A. Drozd by Zoom. The parties are DIRECTED to prepare to address at that time: (1) the parties' positions regarding whether the court should resolve this action on the briefing currently before the court; and (2) to address the applicability of the court's reasoning in its recent orders in Danish v. Noem, No. 2:26-cv-01069-DAD-SCR, 2026 WL 851169 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2026) and Portillo Rodriguez v. Warden, No. 1:26-cv-00694-DAD-CKD, 2026 WL 770527 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2026). The court will provide counsel with the Zoom login information by separate email. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#16

Mar 31, 2026

Notice of Appearance

Mar 31, 2026

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

#17

Apr 02, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Audrey Benison Hemesath, GOVT for Warden of the California City Detention Center (Hemesath, Audrey) (Entered: 04/02/2026)

#18

Apr 02, 2026

MINUTES (Text Only) for proceedings held via video conference before District Judge Dale A. Drozd: MOTION HEARING held on 4/2/2026. Carolyn Wiggin appeared by video for petitioner. Audrey Hemesath appeared by video for respondent. Court addressed the parties as to its inclination. Ms. Wiggin addressed the court as to injunction as stated on the record. Ms. Hemesath addressed the court as to its position as stated on the record. After hearing of arguments and discussion, for reasons stated at today's hearing, order to issue. Plaintiffs Counsel Carolyn Wiggin present by Video. Defendants Counsel Audrey Hemesath present by Video. Court Reporter/CD Number: TB ECRO. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 04/02/2026)

#19

Apr 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/2/2026: On 3/9/2026, petitioner filed a motion for temporary restraining order. (Doc. No. 2 .) On 3/23/2026, petitioner filed a first amended petition for writ of habeas corpus. (Doc. No. 12 .) On 3/26/2026, respondent filed an answer to that first amended petition. (Doc. No. 13 .) On 4/2/2026, the court held a hearing at which time the merits of the first amended petition were addressed. For the reasons stated by the court at that hearing, the court finds persuasive its previous orders in Danish v. Noem, No. 2:26-cv-01069-DAD-SCR, 2026 WL 851169 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2026) and Portillo Rodriguez v. Warden, No. 1:26-cv-00694-DAD-CKD, 2026 WL 770527 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2026), where the court ordered the immediate release of petitioners who were subject to a final removal order, had been detained for more than six months, and had demonstrated that there was no significant likelihood of their removal in the reasonably foreseeable future. Here, on 7/5/2025, an immigration judge found petitioner inadmissible, entered a final removal order against petitioner, and granted petitioner's application for withholding of removal. (Doc. No. 12 at 14.) Petitioner has been detained by immigration authorities continuously since that time. (Id.) Based upon its reasoning expressed in Danish, 2026 WL 851169, the court finds that petitioner has met his burden of showing there is not a significant likelihood of removal in the reasonably foreseeable future in light of petitioner's application for withholding of removal being granted. Respondent has not rebutted this showing because, though it represents that it is attempting to identify third country removal options, it has not identified any such country at this time. See Nadarajah v. Gonzales, 443 F.3d 1069, 1082 (9th Cir. 2006) (finding removal not reasonably foreseeable where no third country for removal was identified and the appellant's withholding of removal application had been granted). Therefore, pursuant to the reasoning expressed in Danish and Portillo Rodriguez, the court finds that petitioner's detention has become prolonged.At the hearing the court also discussed with counsel petitioner's request for additional due process protections regarding third country removal, a request petitioner makes only through his first amended petition and not through his motion for temporary restraining order. (Doc. Nos. 2, 12 .) In light of that discussion at the 4/2/2026 hearing (Doc. No. 18 ), the court will decline to address in this order the merits of petitioner's request in his first amended petition and instead will grant the motion for temporary restraining order and direct the parties to meet and confer regarding a briefing schedule as to a motion for preliminary injunction. The court DIRECTS the parties to, in their briefing on the anticipated motion for preliminary injunction, address the differing approaches to due process protections in the third country removal context taken in the orders issued in D.V.D. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec., No. 25-cv-10676-BEM, 2025 WL 1453640 (D. Mass. May 21, 2025) and A.A.M. v. Andrews, -- F. Supp. 3d --, 2025 WL 3485219 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025), and the appropriate relief under the circumstances presented in this action. The parties are further DIRECTED to address whether they are amenable to the court deciding the merits of the pending petition on the briefing submitted in relation to the anticipated motion for preliminary injunction.Accordingly, the court GRANTS petitioner's motion for temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ) and ORDERS as follows: (1) respondent is ORDERED to immediately release petitioner from its custody subject to reasonable terms of supervision as set forth in 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(3), 8 C.F.R. § 241.13(h); and (2) respondent is ENJOINED and RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner, except under exigent circumstances, without first providing petition with 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. Moreover, for the reasons stated at the 4/2/2026 hearing, the court hereby VACATES its order directing production of petitioner's A-File (Doc. No. 10 ) without prejudice to petitioner refiling a motion for discovery if further discovery is necessary, and DENIES respondent's motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 11 ) as having been rendered moot by this order. Petitioner's motion for an order to release medical records for use in establishing irreparable injury from petitioner's continued detention (Doc. No. 14 ) is DENIED as also having been rendered moot in light of this order granting petitioner immediate release. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve the California City Detention Center with a copy of this order. The parties are DIRECTED to meet and confer within seven (7) days regarding a briefing schedule on a motion for preliminary injunction. Should the parties determine an expedited briefing schedule on the merits is appropriate to promote the efficient resolution of this matter, the court will consider a stipulation to that effect. (cc: ICE-California City) (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 04/02/2026)

Apr 02, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for Reconsideration AND Order on Motion for TRO AND Order on Request

Apr 02, 2026

Motion Hearing

#20

Apr 08, 2026

STIPULATION and PROPOSED ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule by Dat Van Hoang. (Oren, Noa) (Entered: 04/08/2026)

#21

Apr 09, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/9/2026: Pursuant to the parties' 20 joint stipulation and good cause appearing, the court sets the following briefing schedule on the issue of the third country removal process: Respondents shall file a brief regarding the third country removal process by 4/15/2026; and petitioner shall file a reply thereto by 4/17/2026. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 04/09/2026)

Apr 09, 2026

Minute Order

#22

Apr 15, 2026

SUPPLEMENT by Warden of the California City Detention Center. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit March Guidance)(Hemesath, Audrey) (Entered: 04/15/2026)

#23

Apr 16, 2026

RESPONSE by Dat Van Hoang to 22 Supplement. (Oren, Noa) (Entered: 04/16/2026)