Eastern District of California • 1:26-cv-07432

#1

Sep 14, 2026

PETITION for WRIT of HABEAS CORPUS against Respondents by Walter Fernando Mantufar Palacios. (Filing fee $ 5, receipt number ACAEDC-13870184) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Baroudi, Lina) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#2

Sep 14, 2026

MOTION for TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER by Walter Fernando Mantufar Palacios. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Lina Baroudi, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 TRO Checklist)(Baroudi, Lina) Modified on 9/17/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#3

Sep 14, 2026

IMMIGRATION NEW CASE DOCUMENTS (Attachments: # 1 Consent Form) (Deputy Clerk ED) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#4

Sep 14, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Carmen Idalia Paniagua for Respondents. (Paniagua, Carmen) Modified on 9/17/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 09/14/2026)

#5

Sep 14, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 9/14/2026: The court has reviewed Petitioner's 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. Noncitizens present without admission who are apprehended in the interior of the United States are subject to discretionary detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1226, not mandatory detention under § 1225(b)(2)(A). See Rodriguez Vazquez v. Bostock, 183 F.4th 1160, 1165 (9th Cir. July 30, 2026). This court has previously addressed claims where noncitizens were re-detained after being released from immigration custody (see, e.g., Selis Tinoco v. Noem, 818 F. Supp. 3d 1141 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2025); Labrador-Prato v. Noem, 815 F. Supp. 3d 1113 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2025); D.L.C. v. Wofford, 1:25-cv-01996-DC-JDP, 2026 WL 25511 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2026)), and where noncitizens were detained by immigration authorities for the first time after having lived in the United States for an extended period of time (See e.g., Alvarez Maciel v. Noem, No. 1:26-cv-01318-DC-CKD, 2026 WL 496948 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2026); Barajas Ortiz v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-01167-DC-SCR, 2026 WL 508419 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 24, 2026)). Respondents shall file an Opposition or Statement of Non-Opposition to the 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by 12:00 PM on 9/16/2026. In their response, Respondents shall indicate whether Petitioner has previously been released from immigration custody, and shall substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that materially distinguish it from Rodriguez Vazquez and this court's applicable orders cited above. Petitioner may file a Reply by 12:00 PM on 9/17/2026. Finally, the court is contemplating ruling directly on the 1 Petition, with the understanding that the court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in support of the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. 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."); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2243 ("The court shall summarily hear and determine the facts, and dispose of [a petitioner's habeas petition] as law and justice require."); A.R. v. Chestnut, No. 1:26-cv-00551-KES-SAB, 2026 WL 227112, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 28, 2026) (considering preliminary injunction and merits of habeas petition simultaneously). Both parties shall address whether they oppose the court ruling directly on the Petition. The matter is not set for a hearing though the court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 09/14/2026)

Sep 14, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - Set Motion and F&R Deadlines/Hearings

#6

Sep 16, 2026

DESIGNATION of COUNSEL FOR SERVICE. Added attorney Shelley D. Weger, GOVT for Respondents, attorney Carmen Idalia Paniagua terminated. (Weger, Shelley) Modified on 9/21/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 09/16/2026)

#7

Sep 16, 2026

OPPOSITION to 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by Respondents. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 (I-213), # 2 Exhibit 2 (Form I-200 - Warrant), # 3 Exhibit 3 (NTA), # 4 Exhibit 4 (RAP Sheet), # 5 Exhibit 5 (I-286))(Weger, Shelley) Modified on 9/21/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 09/16/2026)

#8

Sep 17, 2026

REPLY to 7 Opposition by Walter Fernando Mantufar Palacios. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Baroudi, Lina) Modified on 9/21/2026 (HAH). (Entered: 09/17/2026)

#9

Sep 18, 2026

MINUTE ORDER issued by the Courtroom Deputy for District Judge Dena M. Coggins on 9/18/2026: In Petitioner's 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Petitioner contends that Respondents unlawfully detained him when he appeared at an adjustment of status (AOS) interview on 9/1/2026. Petitioner argues that he "has a liberty interest in his release," and ICE's act in "detaining him for doing exactly what 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) invited him to do deprives him of that liberty without due process, in violation of the [Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)] and the Fifth Amendment." In their 7 Opposition, Respondents do not address Petitioner's detention at his AOS interview and contend that Petitioner is not entitled to relief here because he has not requested a custody redetermination hearing, which is the administrative remedy available to him under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a). However, a custody redetermination hearing would not resolve the violation that occurred here--namely, Respondents' use of "the adjustment of status scheme as a sword when it was intended to be used as a shield." See You, Xiu Qing v. Nielsen, 321 F. Supp. 3d 451, 466 (S.D.N.Y. 2018). Indeed, this court and others have found that the Government violates the INA when it detains a noncitizen at an AOS interview, thereby interfering with the noncitizen's ability to apply for relief to which they are statutorily entitled. See Swinburne v. Warden of the Cal. City Det. Facility et al., 1:26-cv-03544-DC-CKD, Doc. No. 8 (May 18, 2026) (granting temporary restraining order and ordering release); see also You, 321 F. Supp. 3d 451 at 466; Franco v. Meyer, No. 1:25-cv-01620-DAD-CKD, 2025 WL 3280782 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2025). Therefore, for the reasons explained in You and Franco, and in accordance with this court's Order in Swinburne, this court finds that Petitioner has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim that his arrest violated the INA and his 2 Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED, as follows: (1) Petitioner Walter Fernando Mantufar Palacios (A-203-253-494) shall be RELEASED IMMEDIATELY from Respondents' custody with the same conditions he was subject to immediately prior to his detention on 9/1/2026; (2) Respondents shall not impose any additional restriction on Petitioner upon his release, such as electronic monitoring, unless that is determined to be necessary at a future pre-deprivation/custody hearing; (3) Respondents shall RETURN all of Petitioner's documents and possessions (e.g., identification, passport, work permit, social security card, etc.) upon his release from custody; (4) within three days from the date of entry of this Order, Respondents shall FILE a Notice of Compliance with this court confirming that Petitioner has been released in accordance with the above; and (5) if the Government seeks to re-detain Petitioner, it must provide no less than seven days' notice to Petitioner and must hold a pre-deprivation bond hearing before a neutral arbiter, at which Petitioner's eligibility for bond must be considered. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to serve a copy of this Order on the Golden State Annex Detention Facility. This matter is REFERRED to the assigned Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. (Text Only Entry) (cc: ICE-Golden State Annex) (Deputy Clerk CRS) (Entered: 09/18/2026)

Sep 18, 2026

Minute Order AND Order on Motion for TRO AND ~Util - 1 Terminate Deadlines and Hearings

#10

Sep 21, 2026

NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE filed by by Sergio Albarran. Attorney Hemesath, Audrey Benison added (Hemesath, Audrey) (Modified on 9/21/2026 by CRS.) (Entered: 09/21/2026)

#11

Oct 07, 2026

MINUTE ORDER (Text Only Entry) issued by Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 10/7/2026: 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). (Deputy Clerk SH) (Entered: 10/07/2026)

Oct 07, 2026

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

#13

Oct 21, 2026

Extension of Time

#14

Oct 27, 2026

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Sean C. Riordan on 10/27/2026 GRANTING 13 Motion for Extension of Time and EXTENDING the deadline for parties to file any supplemental briefing to 10/29/26. (Deputy Clerk AMW)