Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-06241

#1

Aug 06, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against U.S. Attorney General by Jesus M. Nunez Arias. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#2

Aug 06, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Jesus M. Nunez Arias. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#3

Aug 07, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

#4

Aug 07, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Elisa M. Rodriguez for U.S. Attorney General (Rodriguez, Elisa) (Entered: 08/07/2026)

Aug 07, 2026

Service by Mail

Aug 07, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 3 Immigration New Case Documents served on Jesus M. Nunez Arias. (Deputy Clerk DAR)

#5

Aug 21, 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. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 08/24/2026)

#6

Aug 27, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 08/27/2026. Petitioner, Jesus M. Nuez Arias (A# 045-025-321), a self-represented immigration detainee, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The petition liberally construed asserts petitioner's detention violates the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Due Process Clause based on revocation of release and prolonged detention without a bond hearing. ECF No. 1 . The Ninth Circuit recently held that "[noncitizens] present without admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject to detention regime of § 1226, not § 1225(b)(2)(A)" and "entitled to a bond hearing." Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, No 25-6842, ___ F.4th ____, 2026 WL 2196424, at *3, 7 (9th Cir. July 30, 2026). This court reached the same conclusion in Alvarez Maciel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-01318-DC-CKD, 2026 WL 496948 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2026), Mendez Juarez v. Warden, Mesa Verde Detention Center, No. 1:26-cv-02045-DC-CSK, 2026 WL 1131003 (E.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2026), Calle-Brito v. Santacruz, No. 1:26-cv-02355-DC-DMC, 2026 WL 1482712 (E.D. Cal. May 27, 2026). This court also previously address petitioner's due process claims in Selis Tinoco v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-1762 DC JDP (HC), ___ F. Supp. 3d ____, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), Orellana Gonzalez v. Cerna, No. 1:26-cv-1344 DC JDP (HC), 2026 WL 604193 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 4, 2026), and Yovani v. Warden of the Central Valley Annex Detention Facility, No. 1:26-cv-05648, 2026 WL 2168402 (E.D. Cal. July 28, 2026). Respondents are therefore directed to file a response within 7 days from the date of this order, which shall substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues that materially distinguish this case from Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock or the court's prior orders in Alvarez Maciel, Mendez Juarez, Calle-Brito v. Santacruz, Selis Tinoco v. Noem, Orellana Gonzalez, Yovani and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. The court will construe failure to distinguish the above cited cases as a concession that the cases are not substantively distinguishable. The response shall include petitioner's Form I-213 for each immigration encounter, any orders of release or detention, any custody warrants, notices, or decisions, and if respondents dispute any factual representations in the operative petition, any and all documents necessary to support their view of the facts. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due within 7 days of being served a copy of the respondents' response. Respondents shall NOT TRANSFER petitioner outside of this judicial district, pending further order of the court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (establishing the All Writs Act which empowers the federal courts to "issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions...."); see also F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (emphasizing that federal courts have the power to "to preserve the court's jurisdiction or maintain the status quo by injunction pending review of an agency's action"). (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JAA) (Entered: 08/27/2026)

Aug 27, 2026

Minute Order

Aug 27, 2026

Service by Mail

Aug 27, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Minute Order served on Jesus M. Nunez Arias. (Deputy Clerk JAA)

#7

Sep 03, 2026

MOTION to DISMISS by U.S. Attorney General. (Rodriguez, Elisa) (Entered: 09/03/2026)