(HC) Kumar v. Chestnut et al
| Ravi Kumar |
| Christopher Chestnut, Kristi Noem, Pamela Bondi and Todd M. Lyons |
| 1:2026cv00321 |
| January 15, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Daniel J Calabretta |
| Sean C Riordan |
| Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 21, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
MINUTE ORDER issued by Relief Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 6/17/2026: In light of the referral of petitioner's 2241 petition that is pending before the Court, the parties are directed to submit any additional briefs on the merits, or any stipulation as to how this petition should be resolved, within 14 days from the date of this order. Following expiration of the deadline set herein, the 2241 petition will be deemed submitted on the papers pursuant to Local Rule 230(l). (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk RAA)
|
|
Filing 9
MINUTE ORDER issued by Relief Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 01/21/2026: In light of Respondents' concession that there are no factual or legal issues in this case that render this case distinct from the prior cases cited in the Court's previous minute order (see ECF No. #7 at 1) and for the reasons stated in the orders in those prior cases (see ECF No. 5 ), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. #4 ) is converted to a Motion for Preliminary Injunction and is GRANTED. Respondents are ordered to immediately release Petitioner Ravi Kumar from their custody. Respondents shall not impose any additional restrictions on him, unless that is determined to be necessary at a future pre-deprivation/custody hearing. Respondents are ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from re-arresting or re-detaining Petitioner absent compliance with constitutional protections, which include, at a minimum, pre-deprivation notice describing the change of circumstances necessitating his arrest and detention, and a timely hearing. At any such hearing, the Government shall bear the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that Petitioner poses a danger to the community or a risk of flight, and Petitioner shall be allowed to have his counsel present. The merits of this matter are referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge for all further pretrial proceedings. [TEXT ONLY ORDER] (Deputy Clerk CRN)
|
|
Filing 8
REPLY to #7 Opposition and OPPOSITION to Extended Briefing Schedule by Ravi Kumar. (Adhikari, Laxman) Modified on 1/26/2026 (HAH).
|
|
Filing 7
OPPOSITION to #4 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, REQUEST for 180-DAY Period of Time to respond to #1 Petition by All Respondents. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 1/26/2026 (HAH).
|
|
Filing 6
DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Jonathan Williams, GOVT for All Respondents. (Williams, Jonathan) Modified on 1/26/2026 (HAH).
|
|
Filing 5
MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 1/16/2026: The Court has reviewed Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. #1 ) and Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. #4 ). The issues raised therein appear to mirror those previously addressed by the Court in many prior cases. See Singh v. Andrews, No. 1:25-cv-01543-DJC-SCR; Mariagua v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01744-DJC-CSK; Ortega v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-01663-DJC-CKD. On or before January 20, 2026, Respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that render it distinct from the Court's prior orders in the cases listed above and would justify denial of a preliminary injunction. Respondents should also state whether they oppose this Court converting the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order to a Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Petitioner may file a reply on or before January 21, 2026. The matter is not set for a hearing though the Court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. Petitioner's counsel is DIRECTED to send a copy of the petition and provide the Petitioner's full name and A number to the US Attorney's Office by January 17, 2026 at 10:00 A.M., at their email [email protected]. [TEXT ONLY ORDER] (Deputy Clerk GJM)
|
|
Filing 4
MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Ravi Kumar. (Attachments: #1 Declaration with Exhibits, #2 Proposed Order)(Adhikari, Laxman)
|
|
Filing 3
MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 1/16/2026: MINUTE ORDER: On January 15, 2026, Petitioner filed a #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Petitioner's prayer for relief includes a request that the Court issue a writ of habeas corpus ordering Respondents to immediately release Petitioner from custody. (ECF No. #1 at 22.) If Petitioner seeks emergency relief, Petitioner is DIRECTED to file a motion for temporary restraining order as soon as practicable, but no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of this order. If no motion is filed in that time, this matter shall be referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(17). [TEXT ONLY ORDER] (Deputy Clerk GJM)
|
|
Filing 2
PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 2/20/2026. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk EF)
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against All Respondents by Ravi Kumar. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-12768089) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Adhikari, Laxman)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
