Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Ponce Law Corp x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee | California Eastern
Order
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 09/02/26 RECOMMENDING that the 9 First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus be granted; that Respondents be ordered to provide Petitioner Kerin Fernando Reyes Rui z (A-098-933-634), within 14 days, a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge at which the Government shall bear the burden to establish that Petitioner presents a risk of flight or danger to the community in light of available alternatives to detent ion, so as to justify his ongoing detention; if Respondents fail to provide Petitioner a bond hearing within 14 days, Petitioner shall be immediately released from Respondents' custody; that Petitioner's request for attorney's fees and costs be denied without prejudice to bringing a properly noticed and supported motion; and that Clerk serve the District Court's order on Golden State Annex, enter Judgment in favor of petitioner, and close case. Referred to Judge Dale A. Drozd; Objections to these F&Rs due within 7 days. (Deputy Clerk AJB)
Minute Order
MINUTE ORDER issued by Courtroom Deputy for Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 09/02/2026. In light of petitioner's response to this court's 10 order to show cause and the filing of 11 an amended petition, the Order to Show Cause 10 is DISCHARGED. The court has reviewed the amended petition, which asserts that the revocation of petitioner's release, his prolonged detention without a bond hearing, and the lack of a significant likelihood of his removal in the reasonably foreseeable future violate his due process rights under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(6). ECF No. 11 at 8-12. This court has previously addressed these issues in Pham v. Warden, No. 1:25-cv-01873-DC-AC (HC), 2026 WL 849861 (ED CA March 27, 2026), J.R.M.J. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-cv-1567 DC SCR, 2026 WL 1948264 (E.D. Cal. July 6, 2026), and Huang v. Albarran, 818 F. Supp. 3d 1154 (E.D. Cal. 2026). Because petitioner may be entitled to relief, respondent is directed to respond to the petition within 7 days from the date of this order, see 28 U.S.C. § 2243, which shall substantively address whether there are any factual or legal issues that materially distinguish this case from Pham, J.R.M.J., Huang, and other similar cases previously decided by this court. The court will construe failure to distinguish the above cited cases as a concession that the cases are not substantively distinguishable. Any response must include any and all documents necessary to support their view of the facts. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due within 7 days after being served a copy of respondent's response. (Text Only Entry) (Deputy Clerk JAA)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.