Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-06984

#1

Sep 01, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Warden, California City Detention Facility by Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#2

Sep 01, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#3

Sep 02, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#4

Sep 02, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Joseph Douglas Harman, GOVT for Warden, California City Detention Facility (Harman, Joseph) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#5

Sep 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 9/2/2026: Pursuant to Local Rule 123, the court finds that these actions, Case No. 1:26-cv-06984-DC-CKD and 1:26-cv-02177-DC-JDP, are related because both cases involve overlapping parties, claims, events and/or questions of fact or law. Thus, the court ORDERS that Case No. 1:26-cv-06984-DC-CKD is REASSIGNED to U.S. District Judge Dena M. Coggins and Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. All future filings shall reflect the judge reassignment and use Case No. 1:26-cv-02177-DC-JDP. (Text Only Entry) (cc: Operations Supervisor-Sacramento; JDP) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#6

Sep 02, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 9/2/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and 2 and Motion for a Temporary Restraining in this case, Singh Brar v. Warden, Cal. City Det. Facility, 1:26-cv-06984-DC-JDP ("Singh Brar II"). Petitioner contends that his 6.5-month detention pending removal has grown prolonged and seeks either release or a custody redetermination hearing. In this court's Order denying Petitioner's previous habeas petition in Brar v. Wofford, et al., 1:26-cv-02177-DC-JDP ("Singh Brar I"), the court found that Petitioner's detention of nearly 6 months had not grown unconstitutionally long such that relief was required under principles of due process because the Government had provided sufficient evidence to show that removal was likely to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future given the Government had obtained a travel document, and that the only delay in Petitioner's removal was Petitioner's pending appeal of the BIA's denial of his motion to reopen. Here, Petitioner acknowledges that his appeal is still pending. Thus, the delay in Petitioner's removal proceedings is attributable to his own pursuit of relief from removal, not the Government's failure to execute a final order of removal. See Hakobkokhvyan v. Central Valley Annex, et al., No. 1:26-cv-03489-DC-AC, Doc. No. 15 (E.D. Cal. June 26, 2026) (denying TRO because the delay in removal proceedings was attributable to Petitioner's pursuit of relief from removal, not the Government's failure to execute a final order of removal); Hassan Shafaq v. Warden, Cal. City Correctional Facility, No. 1:26-cv-00299-JLT-SKO, 2026 WL 1785249, at *8 (E.D. Cal. June 22, 2026) (denying habeas petition of noncitizen detained under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1) with pending appeal of his order of removal, stating "Petitioner is awaiting Ninth Circuit review of his final order of removal... As such, he 'foreseeably remains capable of being removed--even if it has not yet finally been determined that he should be removed--and so the government retains an interest in assuring his presence at removal.") (quoting Prieto-Romero v. Clark, 534 F.3d 1053, 1065 (9th Cir. 2008)). Thus, Petitioner's continued detention, albeit prolonged, does not present the same constitutional concerns relating to indefinite detention as those addressed in Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001). Accordingly, Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED. This matter is REFERRED to the Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (cc: JDP) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

#7

Sep 02, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE (TEXT ONLY). Pursuant to 5 Related Case Minute Order, this case has been REASSIGNED to Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson. Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney is no longer associated with the case. The new case number is: 1:26-cv-6984 DC JDP (HC). (Deputy Clerk JJD) (Entered: 09/02/2026)

Sep 02, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 3 Immigration New Case Documents served on Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk DAR)

Sep 02, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 7 Clerk's Notice Reassigning Case, served on Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk JJD)

Sep 02, 2026

Minute Order

Sep 02, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

Sep 02, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 02, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: Minute Orders, filed at Doc. Nos. 5 and 6, served on Jagjit Singh Brar. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS)

#8

Sep 04, 2026

MINUTE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Jeremy D. Peterson on 9/4/2026: Petitioner, an immigration detainee, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, the court must examine the habeas corpus petition and order a response to the petition unless it "plainly appears" that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. It does not plainly appear that petitioner is not entitled to relief. Therefore, the court orders the government to respond to the petition and sets a briefing schedule. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. Within seven days of this order's service, respondent must file an answer to the petition. The answer must address the merits of the petition and set forth the "true cause of the detention." See 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Any argument by respondent that petitioner has procedurally defaulted a claim must be raised in the answer, which must also address the merits of petitioner's claims. Respondent shall attach any documents necessary for resolving the issues presented in the petition. Arguments that are not supported with relevant evidence will not be considered. 2. Petitioner may file a traverse to respondent's answer within seven days of the date of service of that answer. If no traverse is filed within seven days, the petition and answer are deemed submitted. 3. If respondent learns of petitioner's removal or any other change in petitioner's detention status, respondent shall submit a status report notifying the court as soon as practicably possible. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to send petitioner a copy of the in forma pauperis form used by this district. Petitioner shall submit, within thirty days from the date of this order, an affidavit in support of a request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee of $5.00. (Text Only Entry). (Deputy Clerk NAC) (Entered: 09/04/2026)

Sep 04, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 04, 2026

Minute Order

Sep 04, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 8 Minute Order served on Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk NAC)

#9

Sep 11, 2026

MOTION to DISMISS 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Warden, California City Detention Facility. (Harman, Joseph) Modified on 9/17/2026 (KS). (Entered: 09/11/2026)

Sep 16, 2026

RECEIPT number 100009610 for $5.00 for Writ of Habeas Corpus from Sukhveer Kaur f/b/o Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk JPX)

#10

Sep 18, 2026

OPPOSITION to 9 Motion to Dismiss by Jagjit Singh Brar. (Deputy Clerk VLC) (Entered: 09/21/2026)