Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-07103

#1

Sep 04, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Christopher Chestnut by Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#2

Sep 08, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Litigant Letter) (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

#3

Sep 08, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Carmen Idalia Paniagua for Christopher Chestnut (Paniagua, Carmen) (Entered: 09/08/2026)

Sep 08, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 08, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 2 Immigration New Case Documents served on Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk DAR)

#4

Sep 14, 2026

EO: This case was initiated by the same Petitioner who filed earlier habeas petitions in No. 1:26-cv-04862-MWJS and No. 1:26-cv-06281-MWJS. Pursuant to Local Rule 190(d), the court ORDERS reassignment of case No. 1:26-cv-07103-DAD-JDP to U.S District Judge Micah W. J. Smith. All future filings shall reflect this reassignment. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE MICAH W. J. SMITH) (ab) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#5

Sep 14, 2026

CLERK'S NOTICE REASSIGNING CASE. This case has been assigned to District Judge Micah W. J. Smith. The new case number is: 1:26-cv-07103-MWJS. (Deputy Clerk AB) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#6

Sep 14, 2026

EO: Before the court is Petitioner Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez's petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Dkt. No. 1 . In the petition, Petitioner states that he mailed a notice of appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) on July 17, 2026, after an immigration judge denied his request for a change in custody status. At some point, the BIA informed Petitioner that it has no record of his appeal, even though an unspecified "system" states that Petitioner's appeal is pending. On or before September 17, 2026, Respondent is DIRECTED to explain in writing the status of Petitioner's appeal to the BIA. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE MICAH W. J. SMITH) (ab) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

Sep 14, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: A copy of Dkt. No. 6 Entering Order, was served on Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk AB)

Sep 14, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 14, 2026

Minute Order

Sep 14, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: A copy of Dkt. No. 4 Entering Order, and Dkt. No. 5 Clerk's Notice Reassigning Case, was served on Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk AB)

#7

Sep 17, 2026

RESPONSE by Christopher Chestnut to 6 Minute Order,,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 (EOIR Automated Case Information))(Paniagua, Carmen) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#8

Sep 17, 2026

EO: On September 14, 2026, the court ordered Respondent to explain in writing the status of Petitioner's appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) in his bond proceedings. Dkt. No. 6 . The court appreciates Respondent's timely response. Dkt. No. 7 . The response, however, is missing some important information. The response cites the Executive Office for Immigration Review's (EOIR) Automated Case Information System (ACIS) as reflecting that there is "no record of any appeal" in Petitioner's bond proceedings. EOIR's website, however, states both that ACIS does not display "all information about a case," and that the local immigration court should be contacted for bond hearing information. Respondent does not explain what steps, if any, he took beyond reviewing ACIS to determine the status of any BIA appeal in Petitioner's bond proceedings. For example, Respondent does not say if he contacted the BIA or the Adelanto Immigration Court to determine the status of any appeal. The response also does not acknowledge or address a representation made to the court in an earlier case that "Petitioner has appealed the Immigration Judge's July 14, 2026, order denying bond." See Response to Minute Order, Pedro M.T.M. v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-06281-MWJS (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2026). On or before September 21, 2026, Respondent is ORDERED to supplement his response to address: (1) whether the earlier representation that Petitioner had filed a notice of appeal to the BIA was accurate; and (2) if that representation was accurate, what is the status of Petitioner's appeal in his bond proceedings, and what steps were taken to confirm that status. IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE MICAH W. J. SMITH) (ab) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

Sep 17, 2026

Minute Order

Sep 17, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 17, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: A copy of Dkt. No. 8 Entering Order, was served on Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk AB)

#9

Sep 20, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Michael G. Tierney for Christopher Chestnut, attorney Carmen Idalia Paniagua terminated (Tierney, Michael) (Entered: 09/20/2026)

#10

Sep 21, 2026

NOTICE of RELATED CASE(S) 1:26-CV-06281-MWJS by Christopher Chestnut. Attorney Disparte, Quinn added. (Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#11

Sep 21, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Quinn Disparte, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut, attorney Michael G. Tierney terminated (Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#12

Sep 21, 2026

SUPPLEMENT by Christopher Chestnut re 8 Minute Order,,,,,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Appeal Received by DHS but Not Filed with EOIR)(Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#13

Sep 21, 2026

EO: The court has received and reviewed Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus. Dkt. No. 1 . The court intends to rule directly on the petition. It is not clear from the face of the petition, however, whether Petitioner is entitled to relief. Accordingly, under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases -- which the court applies to this Section 2241 habeas petition, as authorized by Rule 1(b) -- the court orders the following: 1. Within seven days of the date of service of this order, Respondent SHALL FILE A RESPONSE to the petition. See Rule 4, Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases. A response can be made by filing (a) AN ANSWER addressing the merits of the petition.Any argument by Respondent that Petitioner has procedurally defaulted a claim SHALL BE MADE in the ANSWER but must also address the merits of the claim asserted. Alternatively, a response can be made by filing (b) A MOTION TO DISMISS the petition. 2. Within seven days after service of this order, Respondent also SHALL FILE any and all transcripts or other documents necessary for the resolution of the issues presented in the petition. See Rule 5(c), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases. The transcripts or other documents shall only be filed electronically and, to the extent practicable, provided in Optical Character Recognition ("OCR") format. Respondent shall not file a hard copy of the transcripts or other documents unless so ordered by this court. 3. If Respondent files an answer to the petition, Petitioner MAY FILE a traverse within seven days of the service of Respondent's answer. If no traverse is filed, the petition and answer are deemed submitted at the expiration of the seven days. 4. If Respondent files a motion to dismiss, Petitioner SHALL FILE an opposition or statement of non-opposition within seven days of the date of service of Respondent's motion. Any reply to an opposition to the motion to dismiss SHALL be filed within seven days after the opposition has been filed in CM/ECF. The motion to dismiss will be deemed submitted when the time to reply has expired. 5. Any motion shall be submitted on the record and briefs filed without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the court. These dates should be considered as firm by all parties. If any party requires additional time, that party should file a motion for amendment of the schedule before a deadline has passed and explain in detail why the party cannot comply with this schedule. Extensions of time will only be granted upon a showing of good cause. All provisions of Local Rule 110 are applicable to this order. 6. Pending the court's decision on the petition, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that Respondent shall not transfer or otherwise take petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction").IT IS SO ORDERED. (JUDGE MICAH W. J. SMITH) (ab) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

Sep 21, 2026

Service by Mail

Sep 21, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: A copy of Dkt. No. 13 Entering Order, was served on Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk AB)

Sep 21, 2026

Minute Order

#14

Sep 28, 2026

REPLY by Christopher Chestnut re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Attachments: # 1 NTA, # 2 IJ Order denying bond, # 3 I-213 and RAP Sheet)(Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#15

Sep 28, 2026

DIGITAL AUDIO RECORDING of DAR of Bond Hearing filed by Christopher Chestnut re 14 . Date & Time Time unavailable, Duration Time unavailable. File size [9.9 MB]. (Disparte, Quinn) (Entered: 09/28/2026)

#16

Oct 02, 2026

REQUEST for Immediate Release by Pedro Miguel Toro Marquez. (Deputy Clerk MR) (Entered: 10/05/2026)