Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-08125
(HC) Garcia Lazo v. Chestnut
Active
Case Information
Filed: October 02, 2026
Assigned to:
Mary K. Dimke
Referred to:
—
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause:
8:1105(a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
Active
Last Activity:
October 05, 2026
Parties:
View All Parties →
Docket Entries
#1
Oct 02, 2026
2241 PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Christopher Chestnut by Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
#2
Oct 02, 2026
MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
In Forma Pauperis
#3
Oct 02, 2026
MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
Appoint Counsel
#4
Oct 02, 2026
MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
Temporary Restraining Order
#5
Oct 05, 2026
ORDER AUTHORIZING IN FORMA PAUPERIS STATUS as to Cesar Garcia Lazo signed by District Judge Mary K Dimke on 10/5/2026. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
05 - HC/Order Authorizing IFP AND Order on Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
#6
Oct 05, 2026
IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS. (Deputy Clerk SZ) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
Immigration New Case Documents for Visiting Judge
#7
Oct 05, 2026
DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Edward Oh, GOVT for Christopher Chestnut (Oh, Edward) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Main Document:
DESIGNATION
#8
Oct 05, 2026
MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry). The Court has reviewed the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, ECF No. 1, and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order ("TRO"), ECF No. 4 . Due to the urgent nature of the requested relief, the Court intends to rule directly on the Petition and will also consider the arguments and materials submitted in support of the Motion for TRO. Respondents shall file a response to the Petition and Motion for TRO by October 13, 2026. Petitioner may file a reply by October 20, 2026. The response shall address the statutory and factual bases for Petitioner's current detention, the circumstances of his initial entry and any prior detention and release, the circumstances of his July 2026 arrest, whether he has received a bond hearing and its outcome, and the current status of his removal proceedings. Respondents shall specifically address whether Petitioner is a member of the class or subclass provisionally certified in Garro Pinchi v. Noem, 813 F.Supp.3d 973 (N.D. Cal. 2025), the applicability and current status of that December 19, 2025, order staying the challenged re-detention policy, and whether Petitioner's detention complies with that order. If Petitioner was previously released from immigration custody, Respondents shall identify any materially changed circumstances concerning flight risk or dangerousness relied upon in returning him to custody. Respondents shall also address the application of Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, 183 F.4th 1160 (9th Cir. 2026), to Petitioner's detention. The response must include Petitioner's (A-File # 242-181-971) full and complete Form I-213, any notices to appear, any orders of release or detention, any documents concerning the grant, expiration, or termination of parole, any custody warrants or notices, any bond determinations, and any other portions of Petitioner's A-File relevant to the issues presented, including any order of removal and any records supporting an alleged violation of release conditions. Respondents shall also provide any criminal records relied upon to justify detention. Failure to timely respond shall be construed as a non-opposition. See L.R. 230(c). Petitioner's Motion for Appointment of Counsel, ECF No. 3, is DENIED without prejudice. His submissions adequately identify the factual and legal bases for his claims. Considering his likelihood of success on the merits and his ability to present his claims in light of their complexity, the Court finds that the interests of justice do not require appointment at this stage. See 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). Pending a ruling on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, Respondents shall not transfer Petitioner out of this District without prior Court approval. 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"). Signed by Visiting Judge Mary K. Dimke on October 5, 2026. (Deputy Clerk CMV) (Entered: 10/05/2026)
Oct 05, 2026
Service by Mail
Oct 05, 2026
SERVICE BY MAIL: 8 Minute Order served on Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk CMV)
Oct 05, 2026
Minute Order AND Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel
Oct 05, 2026
SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Immigration New Case Documents, 5 Order Authorizing IFP Status, Order on Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis served on Cesar Garcia Lazo. (Deputy Clerk SZ)
Parties
Chestnut
Party
(HC) Garcia Lazo
Party