Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-04649

#1

Jun 16, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Todd Blanche, David J. Venturella, in his official capacity as the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Field Office Director for the San Francisco Enforcement and Removal Operations field office, Markwayne Mullin, Warden, Golden State Annex Detention Facility by Eyuphan Onat. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13467411) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit)(Sale, Jacqueline) (Entered: 06/16/2026)

#2

Jun 17, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Deputy Clerk ED) (Entered: 06/17/2026)

#3

Jun 17, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Sean Davis, GOVT for Todd Blanche,Sean Davis, GOVT for Field Office Director for the San Francisco Enforcement and Removal Operations field office,Sean Davis, GOVT for Markwayne Mullin,Sean Davis, GOVT for David J. Venturella,Sean Davis, GOVT for Warden, Golden State Annex Detention Facility (Davis, Sean) (Entered: 06/17/2026)

#4

Jun 18, 2026

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

#5

Jun 25, 2026

RESPONSE by Todd Blanche, Field Office Director for the San Francisco Enforcement and Removal Operations field office, Markwayne Mullin, David J. Venturella, Warden, Golden State Annex Detention Facility to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,, 4 Minute Order,,,,, Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings,,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 213 and RAP sheet)(Davis, Sean) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

#6

Jun 29, 2026

Traverse

#7

Jun 29, 2026

Temporary Restraining Order

#8

Jun 29, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued on 6/29/2026 by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Respondents' 5 Response, and Petitioner's 6 Traverse. Despite the briefing on the pending Petition being complete, on 6/29/2026, Petitioner filed a 7 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, seeking release based on the fact that Respondents did not distinguish this court's prior orders in 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). However, Respondents emphasize in their 5 Response that Petitioner was "re-detained following an encounter with law enforcement and arrest," (See Doc. No. 5 at 4), specifically Petitioner was arrested for a DUI on 5/23/2026 and he was detained by ICE just three days later on 5/26/2026, which does distinguish this case from Selis. Unlike the petitioner in Selis, who had been arrested for a DUI, reported his arrest to the ICE officer a few days later, remained released on his own recognizance for nearly 10 months before being re-detained, here Petitioner was promptly detained following his DUI arrest. Thus, unlike in Selis, Respondents have provided a non-pretextual changed circumstance that may warrant revocation of Petitioner's prior release. This court has previously found that where the Government asserts a non-pretextual change in circumstance potentially warranting revocation of a non-citizen's release, the proper remedy for the Government's failure to provide the petitioner with a pre-deprivation bond hearing is a post-deprivation bond hearing, not immediate release. See Calvillo v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-00569-DC-CSK, 2026 WL 253627 at *3 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 31, 2026) ("[W]hile the court finds that Petitioner is likely to succeed on the merits of her claim that her re-detention without a bond hearing violated her right to due process, the court will order that the proper remedy for this violation is that Petitioner receive a post-deprivation bond hearing in which Respondents must show, by clear and convincing evidence, that the alleged changed circumstances demonstrate that Petitioner is either a flight risk or threat to public safety, such that her detention is justified."). Accordingly, Petitioner's 7 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order seeking release from custody is DENIED. However, because Respondents have not otherwise made any new legal arguments or identified any legal issues in this case that would distinguish it from the court's aforementioned prior decisions, and Petitioner seeks in his Petition the alternative relief of a bond hearing, the court GRANTS the 1 Petition as follows: (1) Respondents shall, within fourteen (14) days of issuance of this Order, provide Petitioner Eyuphan Onat (A-221-346-150) with a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge at which the Government shall bear the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that Petitioner is either a flight risk or risk to community safety such that Petitioner's continued immigration detention is justified; (2) If Respondents fail to provide Petitioner a bond hearing within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, Petitioner shall be immediately released from Respondents' custody on the same terms as Petitioner's previous release; and (3) Petitioner's request for immediate release is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter Judgment for Petitioner and close this case. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 06/29/2026)

#9

Jun 29, 2026

Judgment

Jun 29, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings AND ~Util - Terminate Civil Case