Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-02468

#1

Mar 31, 2026

2241 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS and MOTION for PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION against Warden by Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Deputy Clerk JAW) (Entered: 04/01/2026)

#2

Mar 31, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Deputy Clerk JAW) (Entered: 04/01/2026)

#3

Mar 31, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Deputy Clerk JAW) (Entered: 04/01/2026)

#4

Apr 01, 2026

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 5/4/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk JAW) (Entered: 04/01/2026)

#5

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)

Apr 01, 2026

Service by Mail

Apr 01, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 4 Prisoner New Case Documents served on Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Deputy Clerk JAW)

#6

Apr 06, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 4/6/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 1 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. 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 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 1 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction by 12:00 PM on 4/9/2026. 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 4/24/2026. 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: 04/06/2026)

Apr 06, 2026

Service by Mail

Apr 06, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 6, served on Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

Apr 06, 2026

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

#7

Apr 08, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Yu, GOVT for Warden, attorney Melissa K. Lott, GOVT terminated (Yu, Jonathan) (Entered: 04/08/2026)

#8

Apr 09, 2026

Opposition to Motion

#9

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 AJB) (Entered: 04/10/2026)

#11

Apr 21, 2026

REPLY to 8 Opposition by Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Deputy Clerk OML) (Entered: 04/23/2026)

#10

Apr 23, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#12

May 01, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued on 5/1/2026 by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins: On 3/31/2026, Petitioner filed a 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 1 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. On 4/9/2026, Respondents filed an 8 Opposition to that Motion in which they allege that Petitioner was ordered removed in absentia on 1/28/2015, that there is no judicial stay preventing Petitioner's removal, and that Petitioner's removal to his native El Salvador was imminent. Respondents further argue that 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g) strips this court of jurisdiction to enjoin Petitioner's imminent removal. On 4/21/2026, Petitioner timely filed a 11 Reply thereto in which he concedes that he is subject to a final order of removal but alleges that he filed a Motion to Rescind in Absentia Removal Order and to Reopen Removal Proceedings on 4/8/2026, before Respondents filed their 8 Opposition. Petitioner contends that, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii), his removal is automatically stayed pending resolution of his Motion to Rescind in Absentia Removal Order and to Reopen Removal Proceedings. Because Respondents did not address that Motion to Rescind in their Opposition, Respondents shall file a Supplemental Response by no later than 12:00 PM on 5/8/2026. In their Supplemental Response, Respondents shall address: (1) whether they contest that Petitioner's order of removal is presently stayed pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii); and (2) the asserted statutory basis for Petitioner's continued detention pending resolution of his Motion to Rescind and Reopen. Petitioner may file a Reply on or before 5/22/2026. In addition, pending the issuance of the court's Order resolving the pending 1 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that Respondents shall not take any action to remove Petitioner Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez (A-206-500-636) from the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) ("The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law."); A.A.R.P. v. Trump, 605 U.S. 91, 97 (2025) (issuing order temporarily enjoining applicants' imminent removal pursuant to Section 1651 because the Court "had the power to issue injunctive relief to prevent irreparable harm to the applicants and to preserve [the Court's] jurisdiction over the matter."); B.P. v. Bostock, No. 23-cv-00890-KKE, 2024 WL 2959550, at *5 (finding that the court retained jurisdiction to consider Petitioner's claim because "there is no such order [of removal] in effect at this time" as "the immigration judge rescinded the removal order and reopened the removal proceedings, and those proceedings are currently administratively stayed pending the resolution of this action.") (citing 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii)). (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 05/01/2026)

May 01, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 12, served on Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

#13

May 05, 2026

Miscellaneous Relief

#14

May 08, 2026

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF filed by Warden. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Yu, Jonathan) (Entered: 05/08/2026)

#15

Jun 08, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued on 6/8/2026 by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins: On 4/21/2026, Petitioner filed a 11 Reply in support of his 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 1 Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in which he alleges that he filed a motion to rescind his in absentia removal order while this matter was proceeding such that his removal is now stayed. On 5/8/2026, Respondents filed a 14 Supplemental Brief in which they concede that Petitioner has filed a motion to rescind his removal order and concede that Petitioner's removal is now stayed. However, Respondents argue that Petitioner remains mandatorily detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(2) pending resolution of his motion to rescind. Petitioner did not file a Reply addressing Respondents' arguments and his time to do so has expired. A noncitizen subject to a final order of removal remains subject to § 1231 regardless of any attempt to reopen immigration proceedings. See 8 C.F.R. § 241.4(b)(1). Accordingly, Petitioner has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim that his continued detention while his motion to rescind proceeds violates his statutory or constitutional rights, and his 1 Motion for Preliminary Injunction, 10 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, and 13 Motion for Immediate Release are therefore DENIED. This matter is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 06/08/2026)

Jun 08, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Order, filed at Doc. No. 15, served on Donaldo Antonio Ortiz-Gutierrez. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

Jun 08, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 08, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief AND Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings