Eastern District of California • 1:25-cv-01884

(HC) Singh v. Chestnut

Active

Case Information

Filed: December 16, 2025
Assigned to: Dena M. Coggins
Referred to: Jeremy D. Peterson
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Active
Last Activity: December 18, 2025
Parties: View All Parties →

Docket Entries

#1
Dec 16, 2025
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Main Document: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#2
Dec 16, 2025
Temporary Restraining Order
Main Document: Temporary Restraining Order
#3
Dec 16, 2025
CLERK'S NOTICE to Attorney Simranjit Kaur re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: Your Civil Cover Sheet is not formatted properly, please flatten your PDF and re-file a properly formatted PDF. For information on how toflatten a pdf, please refer to our website under CM/ECF E-Filing > PDF Information > Page 7. If you need assistance, please contactthe CM/ECF help desk at 866-884-5444. (Deputy Clerk SSA) (Entered: 12/16/2025)
#4
Dec 16, 2025
PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 1/20/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 12/16/2025)
Main Document: Prisoner New Case Documents for Magistrate Judge as Presider
#5
Dec 16, 2025
MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 12/16/2025: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Respondents shall file an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to the 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 5:00 PM on 12/18/2025. In their response, Respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decisions in Labrador-Prato v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025), Selis Tinoco v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01762-DC-JDP, 2025 WL 3567862 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. Petitioner may file a Reply on or before 12/22/2025. 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: 12/16/2025)
Dec 16, 2025
Minute Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings
#6
Dec 17, 2025
DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Elliot C. Wong, GOVT for Sergio Albarran,Elliot C. Wong, GOVT for Pamela J. Bondi,Elliot C. Wong, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut,Elliot C. Wong, GOVT for Todd M. Lyons,Elliot C. Wong, GOVT for Kristi Noem (Wong, Elliot) (Entered: 12/17/2025)
Main Document: DESIGNATION
#7
Dec 18, 2025
OPPOSITION by Sergio Albarran, Pamela J. Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem to 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. (Wong, Elliot) (Entered: 12/18/2025)
Main Document: Opposition to Motion
#8
Dec 18, 2025
MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 12/18/2025: In Respondents 7 Opposition to Petitioners 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Respondents do not identify any provision of law or fact in this case that would substantively distinguish it from this courts decision in Labrador-Prato v. Noem, et al., 1:25-cv-01598-DC-SCR, 2025 WL 3458802 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025). Indeed, Respondents concede that this case is not substantively distinguishable. (See Doc. No. 7 at 2.) Accordingly, pursuant to the courts reasoning in Labrador-Prato, Petitioners 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) Petitioner Jashanpreet Singh shall be released immediately from the Respondents custody; (2) Respondents shall not impose any additional restriction on him, such as electronic monitoring, unless that is determined to be necessary at a future pre-deprivation/custody hearing; and (3) If the Government seeks to re-detain Petitioner, it must provide no less than 7 days notice to Petitioner and must hold a pre-deprivation bond hearing before a neutral arbiter pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) and its implementing regulations, at which Petitioners eligibility for bond must be considered. Further, Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by no later than 12/22/2025, as to why this court should not issue a Preliminary Injunction on the same terms as this Order. Petitioner may file a response thereto by no later than 12/23/2025. Respondents may file a reply to Petitioners response by no later than 12/24/2025. If the parties agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties proposal. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 12/18/2025)
Dec 18, 2025
Minute Order
Dec 18, 2025
Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings