Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-01926

#1

Mar 10, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Moises Becerra, Pamela Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem by Sitanilei Tipiloma Vaitaki. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13015587) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#2

Mar 10, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Sitanilei Tipiloma Vaitaki. (Attachments: # 1 Brief, # 2 Declaration, # 3 Exhibits, # 4 Declaration, # 5 Trochecklist, # 6 TRO Proposed Order, # 7 PI Proposed Order)(Salgado, Mario) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#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 MCF) (Entered: 03/10/2026)

#4

Mar 11, 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: 03/11/2026)

#5

Mar 11, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/11/2026: 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 One of the Petition. See e.g., Selis Tinoco v. Noem, 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), Labrador-Prato v. Noem, 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025), and D.L.C. v. Wofford, 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, 2026 WL 25511 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 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 3/16/2026. 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 3/17/2026. 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: 03/11/2026)

Mar 11, 2026

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

#6

Mar 17, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#7

Mar 17, 2026

RESPONSE to 6 Motion to Dismiss and Opposition to Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by Sitanilei Tipiloma Vaitaki. (Salgado, Mario) Modified on 3/20/2026 (KS). (Entered: 03/17/2026)

#8

Apr 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 4/2/2026: In Respondents' 6 Opposition to Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents argue that Petitioner is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c) due to his conviction for retail theft. (Doc. Nos. 6 at 1; 6-4 at 5.) Under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), noncitizens who are charged with, arrested for, or convicted of acts "which constitute the essential elements of any burglary, theft, larceny, [or] shoplifting" are subject to mandatory detention during the pendency of their removal proceedings. 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)(1)(e)(ii). The Supreme Court has found that mandatory detention under this section is constitutionally permissible. See Demore v. Kim, 538 U.S. 510 (2003). Additionally, Respondents note that Petitioner has already been provided with a bond hearing at which an immigration judge denied his request for bond, finding that Petitioner is "a danger to the community" due to his conviction. (Doc. Nos. 6 at 1; 6-3.) In Petitioner's Reply, Petitioner does not dispute his conviction but argues that the immigration judge failed to consider all factors set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(f) in denying his request for bond. (Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Questions as to the sufficiency of evidence supporting an immigration judge's bond determination are properly addressed by an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, not a habeas petition to the district court. See, e.g., Leonardo v. Crawford, 646 F.3d 1157, 1159 (9th Cir. 2011). Accordingly, the court finds that Petitioner has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim that his immigration detention violates his Fifth Amendment right to Due Process. Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED. This matter is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JRW) (Entered: 04/02/2026)

Apr 02, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#9

Apr 03, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 4/3/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and the filings in this action. If further briefing and evidence is needed, respondents may file an answer within fourteen days from the date of this order. Petitioner may file a traverse within seven days of the date an answer is filed or due. If no further briefing is filed, the matter will be deemed submitted. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk MCF) (Entered: 04/03/2026)

Apr 03, 2026

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

#10

Apr 14, 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: 04/14/2026)