Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-02010

#1

Mar 13, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Christopher Chestnut, Polly Kaiser, Todd Lyons by Josue Antonio Velasquez Mazariegos. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13030299) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit)(Lal, Prerna) (Entered: 03/13/2026)

#2

Mar 13, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 4/16/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk CLA) (Entered: 03/13/2026)

#3

Mar 13, 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: 03/13/2026)

#4

Mar 13, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Josue Antonio Velasquez Mazariegos. (Attachments: # 1 Notice, # 2 Memorandum, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Declaration, # 5 Proposed Order)(Lal, Prerna) (Entered: 03/13/2026)

#5

Mar 13, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 3/13/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. In that Motion, Petitioner states he was detained on 12/2/2025, over 90 days before filing that Motion. Petitioner does not explain why he did not seek injunctive relief sooner. Notably, Local Rule 231(b) states: "In considering a motion for a temporary restraining order, the Court will consider whether the applicant could have sought relief by motion for preliminary injunction at an earlier date without the necessity for seeking last-minute relief by motion for temporary restraining order." Because Petitioner's 4 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is untimely, the court will CONVERT that Motion to a 4 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Further, the court has previously addressed the legal issues raised by Count Two of the 1 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 Petition, with the understanding that the court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in support of the Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. 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 Preliminary Injunction by 12:00 PM on 3/18/2026. 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 3/19/2026. 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: 03/13/2026)

Mar 13, 2026

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

#9

Mar 20, 2026

Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - Terminate Civil Case

#10

Mar 20, 2026

Judgment