Central District of California • 5:26-cv-04199

#1

Jul 27, 2026

PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (28 USC 2241), Receipt No. ACACDC-42895449 for $5 filing fee, filed by Petitioner Shaken Zhanuzakov. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, # 2 Exhibit Order of the Immigration Judge Granting Stay of Removal, 11/19/2024, # 3 Exhibit Order of the Immigration Judge, In Absentia Removal Order, 9/7/2017, # 4 Exhibit Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order, Form I-871, 4/20/2022, # 5 Exhibit Warrant of Removal/Deportation, 4/20/2022, # 6 Exhibit Information About Reasonable Fear Interview, Form M-488, 4/21/2022, # 7 Exhibit Sworn Statement of Petitioner, April 2022, # 8 Exhibit Order of Supervision, Form I-220B, with Addendum, 4/21/2022, # 9 Exhibit Alternatives to Detention Enrollment Record, Form 71-015A, 4/21/2022, # 10 Exhibit Alternatives to Detention Enrollment, Notice to Alien, 4/21/2022, # 11 Exhibit EOIR Case Portal Record, Appeal Filed 12/12/2024, # 12 Exhibit EOIR Automated Case Information, # 13 Exhibit Correspondence with ICE Deportation Officer, 10/31/2024 to 7/23/2026, # 14 Exhibit Certificate of Live Birth, Petitioner's Minor Daughter D.Z., # 15 Exhibit Notice of Hearing, Los Angeles Immigration Court, 6/30/2026, # 16 Exhibit Order of Release on Recognizance, Form I-220A, Z. Zhakypova, 5/21/2025, # 17 Exhibit Order of Release on Recognizance, Form I-220A, Minor Rider D.Z., 5/21/2025, # 18 Exhibit Notice to Appear, Form I-862, Z. Zhakypova, 5/21/2025, # 19 Exhibit Hospital Record of Birth, Petitioner's Minor Son B.S., 2026, # 20 Exhibit Record of Deportable/Inadmissible Alien, Form I-213, Continuation Page Keep them in that order so the attachment numbers track the exhibit letters. After this entry completes, three more separate filings: CV-071 civil cover sheet, Notice of Interested Parties, Notice of Pendency of Other Actions each under its own designated event. Last check before you upload: confirm the main-document PDF came out of Word and has the rules and correct fonts. That's the only file in this batch where it matters. are you sure we combine cv27a and petition? Reconsidered document structure and acknowledged prior conflicting guidance Reconsidered document structure and acknowledged prior conflicting guidance No, I'm not sure and I shouldn't have written "either is accepted; one PDF is cleaner" in the instructions, because I never checked it. On reflection I think combining is the riskier choice, and here's the actual tension. L.R. 5-4.3.1 the same rule that forced the exhibits into nineteen separate files says a PDF may contain no more than one document or portion of one document. Whether combining violates it turns on a question I can't answer for you with confidence: is the counseled petition supplemental pages of the CV-27A form, in which case they're one document and combining is fine, or is it a separate pleading or supporting memorandum, in which case combining puts two documents in one file and breaks the rule. I applied that rule scrupulously to the exhibits and then didn't apply it here. That's the inconsistency you're catching. So: separate. CV-27A as the Main Document. The counseled petition as Attachment 1, category Supplement if that's in the dropdown, otherwise Memorandum or the closest fit, description Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Exhibits then become attachments 2 through 20, same order and descriptions as before. That structure is safe under either reading it never combines two documents into one file, and this screen expressly invites supporting documents into Attachments. It also matches what your reviewer actually said, which was to attach the petition to the form rather than merge it. The asymmetry decides it. If you separate and the clerk would have accepted a combined file, nothing happens. If you combine and the clerk reads them as two documents, you get a notice of discrepancy and a re-file on a case where the seven-day answer clock is already running. Diagnosed incorrect fee classification; advised contacting ECF help desk Diagnosed incorrect fee classification; advised contacting ECF help desk Stop. Don't pay that. $405 is the standard civil complaint fee. A § 2241 habeas petition is $5 under 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). The system quoting you $405 means it's treating this filing as an ordinary civil complaint, not a habeas petition and that's a classification problem, not a payment problem. Paying it would be the wrong number and wouldn't fix the underlying misclassification. The likely cause is the event chain. You went in through Complaints and Other Initiating Documents, which is the generic civil-complaint event group and carries the $405 fee. CACD almost certainly has a habeas-specific initiating event that carries the $5 fee and dockets as a petition. I raised this once when the screen asked for "the title of your moving document" and I noted that language was motion-flow, not petition-flow and then let it go instead of stopping you. That was the moment to stop, and I didn't press it. This is the downstream cost. Where that leaves you: clean. Docket empty, nothing filed, no money spent. The case exists at 5:26-cv-04199 with the parties entered. Nothing to unwind. What to do, and it's a morning job, not a midnight one. Call the CACD ECF help desk and ask two specific things: Which docket event to use for a counseled § 2241 immigration habeas petition in an already-opened case, so the fee assesses at $5 rather than $405. Whether case 5:26-cv-04199 was opened with the correct case type and fee code for a habeas petition, or whether the case type needs correction on their side first. The opening screen had you at cause 08:1105 and Nature of Suit 463 worth confirming those took, since the $405 prompt suggests something in the case's fee classification says civil complaint. Before you call, check Utilities > Internet Payment History to confirm no charge landed tonight, and glance at the docket header for the fee status line. Nothing is running against you. The GO 26-05 clock starts on docketing, so an empty docket means no deadline is ticking. Your documents are executed July 27 and stay that way regardless of when they're filed; a later file stamp on earlier-executed documents is ordinary. Everything is staged and correct petition with the case number, flattened cover sheet, nineteen exhibits, both notices. The only open item is your CV-27A flatten via Print Save as PDF. Get the event question answered and this goes up in ten minutes. i found a habeas event Good. Two things to confirm before you commit, since we just learned what a wrong event costs. Watch the fee prompt. It should read $5.00, not $405. That's the tell that the event is correctly classified. If it quotes $405 again, back out and call the help desk rather than paying same reasoning as before. Read the docket-text preview at the confirmation screen before the final submit. You want it to describe a petition for writ of habeas corpus. If it comes out as "APPLICATION" or "COMPLAINT," stop there. Everything else should carry over as before: filer petitioner, against all five respondents, CV-27A as Main Document with the petition at attachment 1 and Exhibits A through P at 2 through 20. The habeas event may present a different attachment interface if the Category dropdown offers different options, Exhibit for the exhibits and whatever fits for the petition; the descriptions are unchanged. And the CV-27A still needs flattening Print Save as PDF on your machine. That error hasn't gone away just because the event changed. Do that before you start the entry, along with staging the other twenty files, and commit quickly given how the last two attempts ended. One useful consequence of a properly classified habeas event: it may handle the GO 26-05 scheduling notice automatically, and it may not prompt for a magistrate consent form separately. Note what it does so we know what's left to file afterward.) (Attorney Deron Smallcomb added to party Shaken Zhanuzakov(pty:pet))(Smallcomb, Deron) (Entered: 07/27/2026)

#2

Jul 28, 2026

The Petitioner has voluntarily consented to have a Magistrate Judge conduct all further proceedings in this case, including trial and entry of judgment. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (et) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#3

Jul 28, 2026

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. (et) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#4

Jul 28, 2026

Notice of General Order 26-05 and Briefing Schedule. (et) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#5

Jul 28, 2026

Notice Notice of Errata filed by Petitioner Shaken Zhanuzakov. (Smallcomb, Deron) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#6

Jul 28, 2026

CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE OF INTERESTED PARTIES (L.R. 7.1-1) - CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Petitioner Shaken Zhanuzakov, (Smallcomb, Deron) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#7

Jul 28, 2026

Notice Notice of Pendency of Other Actions or Proceedings filed by Petitioner Shaken Zhanuzakov. (L.R. 83-1.4) (Smallcomb, Deron) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

#8

Jul 28, 2026

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Petitioner Shaken Zhanuzakov. (Smallcomb, Deron) (Entered: 07/28/2026)

Jul 28, 2026

2241 Initial Case Assignment Consent or Declination

#9

Aug 04, 2026

Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)

#10

Aug 04, 2026

Answer to Complaint

#11

Aug 04, 2026

Traverse

Aug 05, 2026

Immigration 2241 Full Consent