Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-02420

#1

Mar 30, 2026

(2241) PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Current or Acting United States Attorney General, Current or Acting Director, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Current or Acting Field Office Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Warden of the Mesa Verde Detention Facility, Current or Acting Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security by Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk AML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#2

Mar 30, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk AML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

Mar 30, 2026

RECEIPT number 100007729 for $5.00 fbo Jose Marroquin Ordonez from The Geo Group Inc. (Deputy Clerk AML)

#3

Mar 31, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED: Consent or Decline due within 30 days. (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk AML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#4

Mar 31, 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: 03/31/2026)

Mar 31, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 3 Prisoner New Case Documents served on Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk AML)

Mar 31, 2026

Service by Mail

#5

Apr 02, 2026

Order to Show Cause

Apr 02, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 5 Order to Show Cause served on Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk SSA)

Apr 02, 2026

Service by Mail

#6

Apr 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. (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 04/10/2026)

#7

Apr 22, 2026

Notice of Related Case

#8

Apr 23, 2026

Dismiss

#9

Apr 24, 2026

Order

Apr 24, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 9 Order served on Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk AJB)

Apr 24, 2026

Service by Mail

#10

Jun 18, 2026

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS (Text only) signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 6/18/2026: After petitioner initiated this habeas action, the court related this case to petitioner's previous habeas case, 1:26-cv-0101-WBS-JDP. (ECF No. 9 .) In that prior case, the court denied petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus. (See 1:26-cv-0101-WBS-JDP, ECF No. 18 .) In this action, respondents have moved to dismiss the petition as duplicative. (ECF No. 8 .) "Plaintiffs generally have no right to maintain two separate actions involving the same subject matter at the same time in the same court and against the same defendant." Adams v. Cal. Dep't of Health Servs., 487 F.3d 684, 688 (9th Cir. 2007) (cleaned up). Where, as here, "a new pro se petition is filed before the adjudication of a prior petition is complete, the new petition should be construed as a motion to amend the pending petition rather than as a successive application." See Woods v. Carey, 525 F.3d 886, 888-90 (9th Cir. 2008). However, because petitioner had counsel in his prior proceeding, "construing the later-filed petition as a motion to amend would serve no purpose." See Lopez v. Warden, California City Corr. Ctr., No. 2:26-cv-0541-KES-EPG-HC, 2026 WL 564431, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2026), report and recommendation adopted, 2026 WL 895693 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 1, 2026). Thus, the instant action is duplicative and should be dismissed. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that petitioner's motion for the appointment of counsel, ECF No. 2, is DENIED. Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that: (1) respondents' motion to dismiss, ECF No. 8, be GRANTED; (2) the petition for writ of habeas corpus, ECF No. 1, be DENIED; and (3) the Clerk of Court be ordered to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days of service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Any such document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations," and any response shall be served and filed within seven days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). (Deputy Clerk NAC) (Entered: 06/18/2026)

Jun 18, 2026

Findings and Recommendations AND Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel

Jun 18, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 10 Findings and Recommendations served on Jose Marroquin Ordonez. (Deputy Clerk NAC)

Jun 18, 2026

Service by Mail