District of Colorado • 1:26-cv-03504

#1

Aug 03, 2026

APPLICATION for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 USC 2241 (Filing fee $ 5, Receipt Number ACODC-11183979)Attorney Skylar Madison Larson added to party Marco Uriel Rodriguez Hernandez(pty:pet), filed by Marco Uriel Rodriguez Hernandez. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Larson, Skylar) (Entered: 08/03/2026)

#2

Aug 03, 2026

Case assigned to Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico and drawn to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung. Text Only Entry. (manoe, ) (Entered: 08/03/2026)

#3

Aug 03, 2026

Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (manoe, ) (Entered: 08/03/2026)

#4

Aug 04, 2026

ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of Local Civ. R. 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions, and (5) pursuant to Local Civ. R. 16.6 and at the discretion of the Magistrate Judge, convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 8/4/2026. Text Only Entry. (rkeec) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

#5

Aug 04, 2026

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The petitioner must serve the respondents with 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. The petitioner need not serve a summons with a copy of the petition. The petitioner must promptly file proof of service in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(l)(1).Having reviewed the petition, I find that good cause appears, and it is therefore ORDERED that the respondents must SHOW CAUSE within three weeks after service of the petition why the application for a writ of habeas corpus should not be granted. The petitioner may file a reply within two weeks of service of the response(s).SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 8/4/2026. Text Only Entry. (rkeec) (Entered: 08/04/2026)

Aug 04, 2026

Order to Show Cause

Aug 04, 2026

Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge

#6

Aug 06, 2026

AFFIDAVIT/RETURN of Service of ECF Nos. 1 and 5 upon Juan Baltazar, George Valdez, David Venturella, Markwayne Mullin, Todd Blanche, and Civil Process Clerk U.S. Attorney's Office District of Colorado on 08/04/2026, filed by Petitioner Marco Uriel Rodriguez Hernandez (Larson, Skylar) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#7

Aug 06, 2026

Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by Petitioner Marco Uriel Rodriguez Hernandez. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Larson, Skylar) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#8

Aug 07, 2026

NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Elizabeth Erin Puskar on behalf of Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George Valdez, David VenturellaAttorney Elizabeth Erin Puskar added to party Juan Baltazar(pty:res), Attorney Elizabeth Erin Puskar added to party Todd Blanche(pty:res), Attorney Elizabeth Erin Puskar added to party Markwayne Mullin(pty:res), Attorney Elizabeth Erin Puskar added to party George Valdez(pty:res), Attorney Elizabeth Erin Puskar added to party David Venturella(pty:res) (Puskar, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#9

Aug 07, 2026

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 7 Petitioner's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.The petitioner has satisfied the procedural requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(1) and has made a sufficient showing to support the issuance of a temporary restraining order enjoining his removal from the United States pending further order of the Court. In light of the procedural issues surrounding the filing of the petitioner's appeal of his removal order to the Board of Immigration Appeals, it is unclear whether the order of removal has become administratively final. See Orellana Cruz v. Oddo, No. 3:26-cv-00284, 2026 WL 1650733, at *3 to *4 (W.D. Pa. June 8, 2026) ("The BIA has authority to determine whether an appeal is timely, whether it should be dismissed as untimely, and whether any exception or equitable tolling principle applies." (citing In re Morales-Morales, 28 I. & N. Dec. 714, 716 (B.I.A. 2023))). The threatened harm to the petitioner from a potentially premature removal outweighs any minimal harm to the respondents that may result from a delay in removal, and a temporary restraining order will not be adverse to the public interest. Removing the petitioner from the United States could deprive this Court of jurisdiction. See A.A.R.P. v. Trump, 605 U.S. 91, 94-98 (2025) (court may issue temporary injunctive relief to preserve jurisdiction over habeas proceedings (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a))). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(c), I find it appropriate to waive the security requirement. See Winnebago Tribe of Neb. v. Stovall, 341 F.3d 1202, 1206 (10th Cir. 2003) (court has wide discretion in determining whether to require security); Brumfiel v. U.S. Bank, No. 12-cv-02716-WJM, 2013 WL 1874186, at *7 (D. Colo. May 6, 2013) (same).It is therefore ORDERED that:The respondents and their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and any other persons who are in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Order by personal service or otherwise are TEMPORARILY RESTRAINED from removing the petitioner from the United States pending further order of the Court, if he has not been removed already;The petitioner must promptly provide the respondents' counsel with notice of this Order;The respondents must file a response to the petitioner's motion on or before 8/13/2026, in which they must SHOW CAUSE why the Court should not enter a preliminary injunction extending the temporary relief set forth in this Order until final adjudication of this case on the merits. I will determine whether to set a preliminary-injunction hearing after reviewing the response. The petitioner may file a reply on or before 8/17/2026; andPursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2), this temporary restraining order will expire fourteen days after entry, unless the Court extends it for good cause before that time, the defendant consents to an extension, or the Court grants a motion to dissolve or modify it pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(4).SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 08/07/2026. Text Only Entry. (agryan) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

Aug 07, 2026

Order on Motion for TRO

#10

Aug 10, 2026

Enforce

#11

Aug 10, 2026

ORDER. The respondents must respond to 7 Petitioner's Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and 10 Petitioner's Emergency Motion to Enforce Temporary Restraining Order on or before 8/12/2026. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 08/10/2026. Text Only Entry. (agryan) (Entered: 08/10/2026)

Aug 10, 2026

Order

#12

Aug 12, 2026

RESPONSE to 7 Emergency MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Respondents Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George Valdez, David Venturella. (Puskar, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

#13

Aug 12, 2026

RESPONSE to 10 Emergency MOTION to Enforce 9 Order on Motion for TRO,,,,,,,,,,,, filed by Respondents Juan Baltazar, Todd Blanche, Markwayne Mullin, George Valdez, David Venturella. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exh. A)(Puskar, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/12/2026)

#14

Aug 13, 2026

ORDER re: 12 and 13 Responses. The petitioner may file replies on or before 8/17/2026. SO ORDERED by Chief Judge Daniel D. Domenico on 08/13/2026. Text Only Entry. (agryan) (Entered: 08/13/2026)

Aug 13, 2026

Order