Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-07635

#1

Sep 21, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Defendants by Yogesh Kumar. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13903322) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Jindal, Yash) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#2

Sep 21, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS. (Attachments: # 1 Order re Consent) (Deputy Clerk SSA) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#3

Sep 21, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 9/21/2026: This matter is REFERRED to the assigned U.S. Magistrate Judge for further proceedings pursuant to Local Rule 302 and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Pending the Court's ruling on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Respondents shall NOT TRANSFER Petitioner out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 608 (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."). (TEXT ONLY ENTRY) (Deputy Clerk MDK) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#4

Sep 21, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Attorney Jonathan Williams, GOVT added for All Respondents. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 9/25/2026 (KS). (Entered: 09/21/2026)

Sep 21, 2026

Minute Order

#5

Sep 22, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Chief Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/22/2026: Respondents are GRANTED 7 (seven) days within which to file a response to Petitioner's 1 Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Respondents shall include with the response all exhibits necessary to the determination of the issues raised in the Petition. Petitioner may file a reply within 7 (seven) days of service of the response. Petitioner A No. 240 243 351. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk LMK) (Entered: 09/22/2026)

Sep 22, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

#6

Sep 29, 2026

ANSWER (Reply) to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by All Respondents. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E) (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 10/7/2026 (KS). (Entered: 09/29/2026)

#7

Sep 29, 2026

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. (Anonymous) (Entered: 09/29/2026)

#8

Sep 29, 2026

TRAVERSE/REPLY by Yogesh Kumar. (Jindal, Yash) Modified on 10/7/2026 (KS). (Entered: 09/29/2026)

#9

Oct 02, 2026

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS (Text Only): Petitioner is proceeding with a 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 challenging arrest and detention by ICE. Prior to ICE arrest, Petitioner was released into the United States by ICE premised upon either an explicit or implicit finding that Petitioner was not dangerous or a flight risk. Petitioner did not commit any crimes while on release and is not subject to a final order of removal. Petitioner was not provided with a hearing before an immigration judge as to whether custody was appropriate either before or contemporaneous with arrest. Considering these factors, and consistent with H.S. v. Warden, Golden State Annex Detention Facility, 1:25-cv-1924 CKD P, 2026 WL 445312 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 17, 2026); Esteban-Escalante v. Warden, Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center, 1:26-cv-0096 DC CKD P, 2026 WL 392393 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 12, 2026); Rebolledo v. Chestnut, 1:25-cv-1904 CKD P, 2026 WL 218809 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2026) and Martinez v. Chestnut, 1:25-cv-1826 TLN CKD P, 2026 WL 121221 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2026) the court finds Petitioner's Fifth Amendment right to due process was violated, RECOMMENDS THAT THE 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS BE GRANTED, PETITIONER BE ORDERED RELEASED FROM ICE CUSTODY AND THIS CASE BE CLOSED. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 7 (seven) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 7 (seven) days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). Petitioner A No. 240 243 351. (Deputy Clerk LMK) (Entered: 10/02/2026)

Oct 02, 2026

Findings and Recommendations

#10

Oct 09, 2026

OBJECTIONS to 9 FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS by Respondents. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 10/19/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 10/09/2026)

#11

Oct 13, 2026

REPLY by Yogesh Kumar re 10 Objections to Findings and Recommendations. (Jindal, Yash) (Entered: 10/13/2026)

#12

Oct 20, 2026

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/19/26 ADOPTING 9 Findings and Recommendations IN FULL. 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is GRANTED. Respondents are ORDERED to IMMEDIATELY RELEASE Petitioner YOGESH K. (A# 240-243-351) from custody and to return all of Petitioner's documents and possessions at the time of release. Respondents shall file a notice certifying compliance with this provision within 2 court days of the date of this Order.Respondents are ENJOINED from re-detaining Petitioner, while subject to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a), absent compliance with statutory and constitutional protections, including a minimum of seven-days' notice and a pre-deprivation hearing before a neutral factfinder where the government must establish by clear and convincing evidence that its interest in protecting the public or ensuring Petitioner appears at future immigration proceedings outweighs Petitioner's constitutionally protected interest in remaining free from detention such that no alternative to detention can mitigate that risk. At any such hearing, Petitioner shall be allowed to have counsel present. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Central Valley Annex and enter judgment in favor of Petitioner. CASE CLOSED. (cc Central Valley Annex) (Deputy Clerk KML) (Entered: 10/20/2026)

#13

Oct 20, 2026

JUDGMENT dated *10/20/26* pursuant to order signed by Chief District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/19/26 in favor of Petitioner. (Deputy Clerk KML) (Entered: 10/20/2026)

#14

Oct 22, 2026

NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE re 12 Order by Respondents. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 10/23/2026 (KLY). (Entered: 10/22/2026)