Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-05705

#1

Jul 22, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Todd Blanche, Christopher Chestnut, Orestes Cruz, Markwayne Mullin, David J. Venturella by Crisanto Vazquez Alvarado. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13621833) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet civil coversheet, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit, # 6 Exhibit)(Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#2

Jul 22, 2026

PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Crisanto Vazquez Alvarado for attorney Margie S. Lazo to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 300, receipt number ACAEDC-13621879) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit certificate of good standing) (Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#3

Jul 22, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Deputy Clerk ED) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#4

Jul 22, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Elisa M. Rodriguez for Todd Blanche,Elisa M. Rodriguez for Christopher Chestnut,Elisa M. Rodriguez for Orestes Cruz,Elisa M. Rodriguez for Markwayne Mullin,Elisa M. Rodriguez for David J. Venturella (Davis, Sean) (Entered: 07/22/2026)

#5

Jul 23, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (TEXT ONLY): Before the court is the application of Margie S. Lazo, attorney for Plaintiff Crisanto Vazquez Alvarado for admission to practice pro hac vice. L.R. 180(b)(2). Following review, the application for admission to practice pro hac vice is HEREBY GRANTED. The pro hac vice attorney is DIRECTED to request filing access through PACER. Minute order signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Singer on 7/23/2026. (Deputy Clerk EV) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

#6

Jul 23, 2026

ORDER to Respond; ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule; ORDER to Electronically File Transcripts and Other Necessary Documents, signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Singer on 07/23/2026. Twenty-One Day Deadline. (Deputy Clerk CM) (Entered: 07/23/2026)

Jul 23, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Application for Pro Hac Vice

#7

Aug 13, 2026

MOTION to DISMISS by Todd Blanche, Christopher Chestnut, Orestes Cruz, Markwayne Mullin, David J. Venturella. (Rodriguez, Elisa) (Entered: 08/13/2026)

#8

Aug 14, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry): On August 13, 2026, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss, (Doc. 7 ), indicating that Petitioner has a pending petition in Vazquez Alvarado v. Vergara, et al., Case No. 1:26-cv-01824-ABD (W.D. Tex.). Respondents contend that the instant petition should be dismissed pursuant to the first-to-file rule. Because the court needs more information regarding the prior petition to determine whether the first-to-file rule applies, the court hereby ORDERS Respondents to provide the court with a copy of that petition by no later than August 19, 2026. In responding to the motion to dismiss, Petitioner is advised that if the court determines the petition is subject to the first-to-file rule, the court may grant Respondents relief, in whole or in part. This may include staying this action until the petition in the Western District of Texas is resolved. Minute order signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Singer on 8/14/2026. (Deputy Clerk EV) (Entered: 08/14/2026)

#9

Aug 14, 2026

OPPOSITION by Petitioner Crisanto Vazquez Alvarado to 7 MOTION to DISMISS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Lazo, Margie) (Entered: 08/14/2026)

Aug 14, 2026

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

#10

Aug 19, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 8/19/2026: Respondents' 7 motion to dismiss is denied. Respondents argue that dismissal or stay of this action is warranted under the first-to-file rule because petitioner has a pending petition in the Western District of Texas. See Doc. 7. In 9 opposition, petitioner indicates that he filed a motion to dismiss the petition that was pending in the Western District of Texas, which was granted. See Doc. 9. Petitioner's voluntary motion to dismiss was unopposed and his petition was dismissed without prejudice. See Doc. 9-1; Doc. 7, Case No. 1:26-cv-01824-ABD (W.D. Tex.). "When applying the first-to-file rule, courts should be driven to maximize 'economy, consistency, and comity.'" Kohn L. Grp., Inc. v. Auto Parts Mfg. Mississippi, Inc., 787 F.3d 1237, 1240 (9th Cir. 2015). The "court analyzes three factors: chronology of the lawsuits, similarity of the parties, and similarity of the issues." Id. Given that the first petition was dismissed without prejudice and the court did not reach the merits, dismissal or stay of this case pursuant to the first-to-file rule is not in the best interest of efficiency, judicial economy, or consistency. The 7 motion to dismiss is therefore denied. This matter is referred to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings. (Deputy Clerk YV) (Entered: 08/19/2026)

Aug 19, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Dismiss

#11

Aug 20, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry): Following the district judge's denial of Respondents' motion to dismiss this action pursuant to the first-to-file rule, (Doc. 10 ), the court RESETS the briefing schedule. Respondents' response to the petition, including all transcripts or other documents necessary for the resolution of the issues presented in the petition, is due on or before September 10, 2026. Petitioner may file a traverse within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of an answer, or shall file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within fourteen (14) days of a motion to dismiss. Any reply to an opposition to a motion to dismiss shall be filed within seven (7) days after the opposition has been filed in CM/ECF. Minute order signed by Magistrate Judge Frank J. Singer on 8/20/2026. (Deputy Clerk CLA) (Entered: 08/20/2026)

Aug 20, 2026

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