Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-06237

#1

Aug 06, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Sergio Albarran, Todd Blanche, Todd M. Lyons, Markwayne Mullin, Warden of the California City Immigration Processing Center by Irma Gutierrez Munoz. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13694297) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Yasrebi, Arash) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#2

Aug 06, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Irma Gutierrez Munoz. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration)(Yasrebi, Arash) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#3

Aug 06, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk LJB) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#4

Aug 06, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Sergio Albarran,Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Todd Blanche,Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Todd M. Lyons,Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Markwayne Mullin,Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Warden, California City Immigration Processing Center (Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 08/06/2026)

#5

Aug 06, 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: 08/06/2026)

#6

Aug 06, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 8/6/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. From these filings, it is unclear whether Petitioner has previously been released from immigration custody, or whether the challenged detention is Petitioner's first contact with immigration authorities. Noncitizens present without admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A). See Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, No. 25-6842, 2026 WL 2196424, at *3 (9th Cir. July 30, 2026). This court has previously addressed claims where noncitizens were re-detained after being released from immigration custody (see, e.g., Selis Tinoco v. Noem, 818 F. Supp. 3d 1141 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025); Labrador-Prato v. Noem, 815 F. Supp. 3d 1113 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025); D.L.C. v. Wofford, 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, 2026 WL 25511 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2026)), and where noncitizens were detained by immigration authorities for the first time after having lived in the United States for an extended period of time (See e.g., Alvarez Maciel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-01318-DC-CKD, 2026 WL 496948 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2026); Barajas Ortiz v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-01167-DC-SCR, 2026 WL 508419 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2026)). Respondents shall file an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to the 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 12:00 PM on 8/10/2026. In their response, Respondents shall indicate whether Petitioner has previously been released from immigration custody, and shall substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that materially distinguish it from Rodriguez Vazquez and this court's applicable orders cited above. Petitioner may file a Reply by 12:00 PM on 8/11/2026. Finally, 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 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."); 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). Both parties shall address whether they oppose the court ruling directly on the Petition, to the extent a ruling on the Petition 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: 08/06/2026)

Aug 06, 2026

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

#7

Aug 09, 2026

Opposition to Motion

Aug 12, 2026

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

Aug 13, 2026

Minute Order