Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-03691

#1

May 13, 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 Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Warden of the California City Detention Facility, Current or Acting Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security by Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#2

May 13, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#3

May 13, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#4

May 14, 2026

ORDER AUTHORIZING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS as to Eddy Grille Gonzalez signed by Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone on 5/14/2026. (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#5

May 14, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 05/14/2026)

#6

May 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: 05/14/2026)

May 14, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 4 Order Authorizing IFP Status, Order on Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis, 5 Immigration New Case Documents served on Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk MR)

May 14, 2026

Service by Mail

#7

May 15, 2026

Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel

#8

May 15, 2026

06 - HC/Order Requiring Respondent to File a Response

May 15, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 7 Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel, 8 Order Directing Respondent to File a Response to the Petition served on Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk EF)

May 15, 2026

Service by Mail

#9

Jun 02, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#10

Jun 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 6/02/2026: (Text Only Entry). The Court has reviewed the 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus and 9 motion for temporary restraining order. The Court has previously addressed the legal issues raised by the 1 petition. See e.g., Luis Alberto R.C. v. Murray, 817 F. Supp. 3d 917 (E.D. Cal. 2025); Elmer Joel M. C. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01622-KES-CDB (HC), 2025 WL 3501200 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2025); W.V.S.M. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01489-KES-HBK (HC), 2025 WL 3236521 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2025); Bilal A. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01715-KES-HBK (HC), 2025 WL 3648366 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2025); Marina V.N. v. Robbins, No. 1:25-CV-01845-KES-SKO (HC), 2025 WL 3701960 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2025); Yon Kervis U. v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-CV-2066-KES-SAB (HC), 2026 WL 88983 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2026); Guzman v. Andrews, No. 1:25-CV-01015-KES-SKO (HC), 2025 WL 2617256 (E.D. Cal. Sept. 9, 2025). The Court intends to rule directly on the 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus, with the understanding that the Court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in support of the 9 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."); Dzhabrailov v. Decker, No. 20-CV-3118 (PMH), 2020 WL 2731966, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 26, 2020) (considering preliminary injunction and merits of habeas petition simultaneously). On or before June 4, 2026, respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that distinguish it from the Court's prior orders in Luis Alberto R.C. v. Murray, Elmer Joel M. C. v. Wofford, W.V.S.M. v. Wofford, Bilal A. v. Wofford, Marina V.N. v. Robbins, Yon Kervis U. v. Chestnut, and Guzman v. Andrews and justify denying the petition, or indicate the matter is not substantively distinguishable. Pending the Court's decision, and unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Court ORDERS that respondents shall not transfer petitioner out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction"). (Deputy Clerk VMG) (Entered: 06/02/2026)

#11

Jun 02, 2026

RESPONSE by Current or Acting Director, San Francisco Field Office, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Current or Acting Director, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Current or Acting Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security, Current or Acting United States Attorney General, Warden of the California City Detention Facility to 9 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, 10 Minute Order,,,,,,,,,, 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 213, # 2 Exhibit NTA, # 3 Exhibit RAP sheet, # 4 Proof of Service Proof of service)(Davis, Sean) (Entered: 06/02/2026)

Jun 02, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 02, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 10 Minute Order, served on Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk VMG)

Jun 02, 2026

Minute Order

#12

Jun 04, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 6/04/2026: (Text Only Entry). The 9 motion for temporary restraining order is denied. Petitioner's motion argues that he is not subject to mandatory detention and relies on cases in which courts considered prolonged detention periods of just over one year without a custody hearing. E.g., Romero Romero v. Wolf, No. 20-CV-08031-TSH, 2021 WL 254435 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2021). But the petition reflects that petitioner has been in immigration detention only since April 23, 2026, Doc. 1 at 12, and petitioner appears to be detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c)(1)(E) (requiring detention for "any alien" who "is inadmissible under" 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) and "is charged with, is arrested for, [or] is convicted of,... any... theft, larceny, [or] shoplifting" offense). Respondents' records show that immigration authorities charged petitioner as inadmissible pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) in 2025, see Doc. 11-2 at 1, and that petitioner was arrested by state authorities and charged with felony grand theft in 2026, Doc. 11-3 at 2. Petitioner fails to establish a likelihood of success on his due process claim, which is the only claim he raises, as his motion does not identify any constitutional violation with respect to his re-detention. This matter is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk VMG) (Entered: 06/04/2026)

Jun 04, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 12 Minute Order, served on Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk VMG)

Jun 04, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 04, 2026

Minute Order

#13

Jun 05, 2026

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

Jun 05, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 05, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 13 Order, served on Eddy Grille Gonzalez. (Deputy Clerk JPX)