Eastern District of California • 1:25-cv-01919

#1

Dec 18, 2025

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

#2

Dec 18, 2025

Temporary Restraining Order

#3

Dec 18, 2025

ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 1/23/2026. (Deputy Clerk CRM) (Entered: 12/18/2025)

#4

Dec 18, 2025

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. (Yasrebi, Arash) (Entered: 12/18/2025)

#5

Dec 18, 2025

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) The Court has reviewed the Petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1 ) and the related request for emergency injunctive relief (Doc. 2 ). Based on the record filed thus far, it appears Petitioner is likely to succeed on the due process claim and that some form of immediate relief may be appropriate. Thus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243, Respondents are ordered to show cause in writing no later than December 29, 2025 why the Court should not grant Petitioners motion for a temporary restraining order. Any response SHALL provide the Court with copies of referenced/relevant portions of Petitioners A-File and other supporting documents, including available documentation related to any asserted violations of release conditions. In addition, Respondents SHALL specifically address why the facts suggest a change in circumstance material to the issue of whether Petitioner is a danger to public safety or a flight risk.See, e.g., Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-CV-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025); Bernal v. Albarran, No. 25-CV-09772-RS, 2025 WL 3281422, at *6 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025). Petitioner may file a reply no later than January 2, 2026. The Court further directs the parties to indicate on or before their respective filing deadlines (1) whether they are requesting a hearing; and (2) whether they agree to convert the request for a TRO into a preliminary injunction without further briefing. Depending on the content of the filings, the Court may set a hearing or may rule on the papers.In the meantime, unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Court ORDERS that Respondents shall not remove Petitioner from the United States nor transfer Petitioner out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting the court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction"). Given the exigent circumstances, the Court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and any subsequent order and finds that Petitioner has satisfied the factors governing the issuance of such preliminary relief.No later than December 18, 2025, to the extent not already accomplished, Petitioners counsel is directed: (1) to serve Respondents with a copy of the Petition, the motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers, along with a copy of this Order, by e-mail to all appropriate recipients including the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California, with a copy to usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov, and by overnight mail; and (2) promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter notices of appearance signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on December 18, 2025. (Deputy Clerk IM) (Entered: 12/18/2025)

Dec 18, 2025

Minute Order

#6

Dec 19, 2025

Certificate / Proof of Service

#7

Dec 29, 2025

Opposition to Motion

#8

Jan 15, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) On December 18, 2025, the Court ordered Respondents to produce with their opposition to the motion for temporary restraining order, documents from Petitioner's A-file, which are referenced in the opposition or are relevant to the issues before the Court. Respondents produced a Form I-831, which was somewhat responsive. However, the document claims either that Petitioner had one violation of ATD (Doc. 7-1 at 5 [Records reviews indicated Chuzon had failed to report as instructed by his ATD conditions on August 28, 2025]) and that he had multiple ATD violations Id. No other detail or documents were provided to explain when these violations occurred or how Petitioner violated his ATD conditions. Thus, no later than 1/20/2026, Respondents SHALL file with the Court the underlying documentation of these violations signed by District Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on January 15, 2026. (Deputy Clerk IM) (Entered: 01/15/2026)

Jan 15, 2026

Minute Order

#9

Jan 20, 2026

Request

#10

Jan 20, 2026

EXHIBIT as to ATD VIOLATION by Sergio Albarran, Pamela Jo Bondi, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem re 8 Minute Order,,,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit ATD Log)(Veneman-Hughes, Robert) (Entered: 01/20/2026)

#11

Jan 21, 2026

REPLY by Ricardo Chuzon Herna re 10 Exhibit. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit)(Yasrebi, Arash) (Entered: 01/21/2026)

#12

Jan 22, 2026

Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings