Central District of California • 5:26-cv-05425

#1

Sep 17, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (28 USC 2241), Receipt No. ACACDC-43339890 for $5 filing fee, filed by Petitioner YUNGANG ZHAO. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Exhibit, # 3 Exhibit, # 4 Affidavit) (Attorney Hovhannes Bayburtski added to party YUNGANG ZHAO(pty:pet))(Bayburtski, Hovhannes) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#2

Sep 17, 2026

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Petitioner YUNGANG ZHAO. (Bayburtski, Hovhannes) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#3

Sep 17, 2026

The Petitioner has voluntarily consented to have a Magistrate Judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of judgment. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (et) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#4

Sep 17, 2026

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Daniel S. Roberts. (et) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#5

Sep 17, 2026

Notice of General Order 26-05 and Briefing Schedule. (et) (Entered: 09/17/2026)

Sep 17, 2026

2241 Initial Case Assignment Consent or Declination

Sep 21, 2026

Immigration 2241 Full Consent

#7

Sep 25, 2026

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE FAILURE TO ANSWER PETITION AND SHOW CAUSE WHY THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED by Magistrate Judge Daniel S. Roberts. To date, Respondents have not filed either of these required documents. As such, they have defaulted on their obligation to "show cause why the writ should not be granted" and to "certify the true cause of the detention." 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Respondents are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing, no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 28, 2026, why they have failed to comply with the Court's order requiring them to file a Notice of Appearance and an Answer and show cause why the habeas petition should not be granted. Respondents may do so by eithe r filing the Notice of Appearance and an Answer in which they address ALL claims and bases alleged in the Petition or by filing a sworn Declaration showing good cause for their failure to comply with the Court's September 17th Order and a comm itment to a date by which they will file the required documents. FAILURE TO RESPOND TO THIS ORDER WILL BE TREATED AS A CONCESSION THAT PETITIONER IS ENTITLED TO THE RELIEF SOUGHT IN THE PETITION, INCLUDING IMMEDIATE RELEASE FROM RESPONDENTS' CUS TODY AND ENJOINING RESPONDENTS FROM RE-DETAINING PETITIONER WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. If Respondents timely file an Answer to the Petition, Petitioner may file a Reply thereto within three days of service of that Answer, after which the case will be taken under submission for decision without oral argument, unless otherwise ordered by the Court. (SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS.) (lkr)