Eastern District of California • 1:25-cv-01998

#1

Dec 23, 2025

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Pamela Bondi, Marcos Charles, Christopher Chestnut, Todd M. Lyons, Kristi Noem by Vivek Bains. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12701892) (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A - C)(Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 12/23/2025)

#2

Dec 23, 2025

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Vivek Bains. (Attachments: # 1 TRO Checklist, # 2 Proposed Order)(Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 12/23/2025)

#3

Dec 23, 2025

CERTIFICATE / PROOF of SERVICE by Vivek Bains re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. (Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 12/23/2025)

#4

Dec 23, 2025

PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Vivek Bains for attorney Luis Angeles to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 300, receipt number ACAEDC-12701907) (Bautista, Cynthia) (Entered: 12/23/2025)

#5

Dec 23, 2025

PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 1/26/2026. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk JJD) (Entered: 12/23/2025)

#6

Dec 24, 2025

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/24/2025: (Text Only Entry).Pending the issuance of the courts order resolving the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that respondents shall not take any action to remove petitioner from the United States or to move petitioner out of the Eastern District of California. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (acknowledging the courts 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 present, the court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending its forthcoming order resolving petitioner's pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order. The court observes that petitioner has already filed a 3 certificate of service at approximately 9:00 PM on 12/23/2025 regarding the 1 petition and 2 motion for temporary restraining order. Therefore, no later than 12/26/2025 at 8:00 AM, petitioner's counsel is DIRECTED (1) to serve respondents with a copy of the petition, motion for temporary restraining order, and accompanying papers, along with this order, to the United States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of California by email at usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov, if they have not already done so; and (2) to promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter Notices of Appearance. Respondents shall file a written opposition to the pending 2 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM on Monday, 12/29/2025. In that opposition, respondents shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decision in Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025), O.A.C.S. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01652-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3485221 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. If the parties were to jointly agree upon a less demanding briefing schedule, the court will consider the parties' proposal.(Deputy Clerk CGH) (Entered: 12/24/2025)

Dec 24, 2025

Minute Order

#7

Dec 29, 2025

Opposition to Motion

#8

Dec 30, 2025

MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/30/2025: On 12/23/2025, petitioner filed a motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 2 ). On 12/24/25, the court set a briefing schedule and directed respondents to address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish this case from the circumstances addressed in this courts recent decisions in Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025), O.A.C.S. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01652-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3485221 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2025), and other similar cases previously decided by this court. On 12/29/2025, respondents filed their opposition (Doc. No. 7 ) to petitioners motion. Respondents concede therein that there are no factual or legal issues in this case that render it distinct from the courts prior orders. (Doc. No. 7 at 4). Respondents also state that they do not oppose treating the temporary restraining order as a motion for preliminary injunction, and they do not request a hearing on the latter motion. (Doc. No. 7 at 4). Accordingly, pursuant to the courts reasoning as stated in Ayala Cajina and O.A.C.S., petitioners motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. No. 7 ) is CONVERTED into a motion for preliminary injunction and is GRANTED, and the court ORDERS the following: (1) respondents are ORDERED to immediately release petitioner from respondents custody on the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his October 16, 2025, detention; (2) respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-detaining petitioner for any purpose, absent exigent circumstances, without providing petitioner notice and a pre-detention hearing before an immigration judge where respondents will have the burden to demonstrate a change in circumstances justifying petitioners re-detention. Under the circumstances of this case, petitioner will not be required to post bond pursuant to Rule 65(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The petition for habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1 ) and counsels pending pro hac vice application (Doc. No. 4 ) are referred to Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JRW) (Entered: 12/30/2025)

Dec 30, 2025

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO

#9

Dec 31, 2025

06 - HC/Order Requiring Respondent to File a Response AND ~Util - Add and Terminate Attorneys