Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-02469

#1

Mar 31, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Respondents by Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#2

Mar 31, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#3

Mar 31, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#4

Mar 31, 2026

MOTION for APPOINTMENT of COUNSEL by Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#5

Mar 31, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 5/4/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

#6

Mar 31, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 3/31/2026: Pending the issuance of the court's order resolving the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that respondent shall not take any action to remove petitioner from the United States or to move petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (acknowledging the court's express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction). Given the exigent circumstances present, the court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending its forthcoming order resolving petitioner's pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order. In light of petitioner's pro se status, the Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to serve respondent with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers, along with this order, to the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov. Counsel for respondent shall promptly enter Notices of Appearance. Respondent shall file a written opposition to the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM Thursday, 4/2/2026. In that opposition, respondent shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decision in Rocha Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025), Singh v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01821-DAD-SCR, 2025 WL 3640678 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. Furthermore, respondent is DIRECTED to indicate in its opposition whether it opposes converting the motion for temporary restraining order into a motion for preliminary injunction and whether it opposes the court resolving the merits of the underlying habeas petition. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties' proposal. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 03/31/2026)

Mar 31, 2026

Service by Mail

Mar 31, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Minute Order served on Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk PAB)

Mar 31, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 5 Prisoner New Case Documents served on Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk OML)

Mar 31, 2026

Minute Order

#7

Apr 01, 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: 04/01/2026)

#8

Apr 02, 2026

OPPOSITION by Respondent Warden to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 2 MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Notice to Appear, # 2 Exhibit Finding of Removability)(Rodriguez, Camilo) (Entered: 04/02/2026)

#9

Apr 02, 2026

Certificate / Proof of Service

#10

Apr 03, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/3/2026: (Text Only Entry); GRANTING 2 Motion for TRO.On 3/31/2026, petitioner Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ). That same day, the court set a briefing schedule and directed respondent to address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from the circumstances addressed in this court's decisions in Rocha Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025), Singh v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01821-DAD-SCR, 2025 WL 3640678 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court. Here, petitioner was paroled into the United States on 10/26/2023, at which time he was issued the A-number 208-996-627. (Doc. No. 1 at 3, 5.) Petitioner was detained on 2/18/2026 by ICE officers outside his house without notice or an informal interview regarding the reason for his detention and was issued a second A-number 244-238-629. (Id.) On 4/2/2026, respondent filed its opposition (Doc. No. 8 ) to petitioner's motion. Respondent concedes therein that it has reviewed Rocha Chavarria and Singh, and that the factual and legal issues present in this case "are not substantively distinguishable from the aforementioned cases." (Id. at 2.) Respondent also states that it does not oppose treating the motion for temporary restraining order as a motion for preliminary injunction, and it does not request a hearing on the latter motion. (Id.) Accordingly, pursuant to the court's reasoning as stated in Rocha Chavarria and Singh, petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ) is CONVERTED into a motion for preliminary injunction and is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) respondent is ORDERED to immediately release petitioner, A-numbers 208-996-627 or 244-238-629, from respondent's custody on the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his 2/18/2026 detention; (2) Respondent is ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner for any purpose, absent exigent circumstances, without providing petitioner notice and a pre-detention hearing before an immigration judge where respondent will have the burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that petitioner is not a danger to the community or a flight risk. 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. The petition for habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ), motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. No. 3 ), and motion to appoint counsel (Doc. No. 4 ) are referred to Magistrate Judge Allison Claire for further proceedings. The Clerk is directed to serve the Golden State Annex Detention Facility with a copy of this Order.(Deputy Clerk CAL) (Entered: 04/03/2026)

Apr 03, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#12

Apr 06, 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 LMS) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

#11

Apr 07, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 04/07/2026.Petitioner, Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales, a self-represented immigration detainee, filed a 1 petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, a 2 motion to proceed in forma pauperis, and a 3 motion for appointment of counsel. Petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED and petitioner is authorized to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of the filing fee in this action. Petitioner's motion to appoint counsel 3 is DENIED without prejudice to filing at a later date because there currently exists no absolute right to appointment of counsel in habeas proceedings, Nevius v. Sumner, 105 F.3d 453, 460 (9th Cir. 1996), and, in light of the court's ruling on the motion for temporary injunctive relief, the court does not find that the interest of justice would be served by appointment of counsel at the present time. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2) (authorizes the appointment of counsel at any stage of the case if "the interests of justice so require"). 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 JAA) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

Apr 07, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 11 Minute Order served on Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk JAA)

Apr 07, 2026

Service by Mail

Apr 07, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

Apr 15, 2026

Service by Mail

Apr 15, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 10 Minute Order served on Roger Oswaldo Banegas Raudales. (Deputy Clerk HAH)