Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-04746

#1

Jun 22, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Warden, California City Immigration Processing Center by Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

#2

Jun 22, 2026

MOTION to PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS by Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

#3

Jun 22, 2026

MOTION to APPOINT COUNSEL by Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

#4

Jun 24, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Deputy Clerk DAR) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

#5

Jun 24, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Camilo Rodriguez, GOVT for Warden, California City Immigration Processing Center (Rodriguez, Camilo) (Entered: 06/24/2026)

Jun 24, 2026

Immigration New Case Documents

Jun 24, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 24, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 4 Immigration New Case Documents served on Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk DAR)

#6

Jun 25, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/25/2026: In light of petitioner's request for an order to show cause within three days why his petition not be granted in his 1 petition for writ of habeas corpus, the court construes the 1 petition as containing a motion for temporary restraining order. Pending the issuance of the court's order resolving the pending 1 motion for temporary restraining order, and unless and until the court orders otherwise, the court ORDERS that respondent 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 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 present, the court finds that this order is warranted to maintain the status quo pending its forthcoming order resolving petitioner's pending 1 motion for temporary restraining order. Further, the court has conducted a preliminary review of the pending motion and petition for writ of habeas corpus and observes that this case may involve core issues that the undersigned has previously addressed in this context. Accordingly, the parties are advised that if the court concludes that petitioner is entitled to the relief that is requested in the pending motion, then the court will also rule on the merits of the underlying petition. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2) ("Before or after beginning the hearing on a motion for a preliminary injunction, the court may advance the trial on the merits and consolidate it with the hearing."); Dzhabrailov v. Decker, No. 20-cv-03118-PMH, 2020 WL 2731966, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 26, 2020) (considering the merits of the habeas petition and motion for preliminary injunction simultaneously). Counsel for respondent shall promptly enter Notices of Appearance if they have not already done so. Respondent shall file a written opposition to the pending 1 motion for temporary restraining order by 5:00 PM on Friday, 6/26/2026. In that opposition, respondent shall substantively address whether any provision of law or fact in this case would distinguish it from this court's decisions in Ayala Cajina v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-01566-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 3251083 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2025); Perez v. Albarran, No. 1:25-cv-01540-DAD-CSK (HC), 2025 WL 3187578 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 14, 2025); Chavarria v. Chestnut, No. 1:25-cv-01755-DAD-AC, 2025 WL 3533606 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2025); Yang v. Kaiser, No. 2:25-cv-02205-DAD-AC (HC), 2025 WL 2791778 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2025); Quichimbo-Jimenez v. Warden, Cal. City Corr. Ctr., 2:26-cv-00739-DAD-EFB (HC), 2026 WL 679378 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 10, 2026); Cardenas v. Chestnut, et al., No. 1:26-cv-02073-DAD-SCR (HC), 2026 WL 785871 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2026); J.P.C. v. Chestnut, 1:26-cv-02108-DAD-JDP, 2026 WL 788129 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2026), and other similar cases previously decided by this court, or otherwise indicate that the matter is not substantively distinguishable. The court will construe failure to distinguish the above cited cases as a concession that the cases are not substantively distinguishable. If respondent opposes this court ruling on the underlying petition, then respondent is DIRECTED to indicate so and provide substantive reasons in support thereof in its opposition. (Deputy Clerk PAB) (Entered: 06/25/2026)

Jun 25, 2026

Service by Mail

Jun 25, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 6 Minute Order served on Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk PAB)

Jun 25, 2026

Minute Order

#7

Jun 26, 2026

Extension of Time

#8

Jun 26, 2026

ANSWER (Response) to 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, OPPOSITION to Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, and REQUEST to WITHDRAW 7 Motion for Extension of Time by Respondent Warden, California City Immigration Processing Center. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6) (Rodriguez, Camilo) Modified on 7/7/2026 (KS). (Entered: 06/26/2026)

#9

Jun 29, 2026

Order AND Order on Motion for Extension of Time AND Order on Motion to Appoint Counsel AND Order on Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis AND ~Util - Terminate Civil Case

#10

Jun 29, 2026

Judgment

Jun 29, 2026

SERVICE BY MAIL: 10 Judgment and 9 Order served on Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk AJB)

Jun 29, 2026

Service by Mail

Jul 13, 2026

MAIL RETURNED as Undeliverable, not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward: 10 Judgment and 9 Order sent to Antonio Cuni Medina. (Deputy Clerk DAR)