墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
微信号: Mooting2018
墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
| 编号 | 日期 | 案件进程 |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2026-02-27 | PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED. Consent or Decline due by 4/2/2026. (Deputy Clerk SR) |
| 4 | 2026-02-27 | MINUTE ORDER signed by District Judge Kirk E. Sherriff on 2/27/2026: The Court has reviewed the [1] petition for writ of habeas corpus and [2] motion for temporary restraining order. The Court has previously addressed the legal issues raised by claim one of the [1] petition. See e.g., Elmer Joel M. C. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01622-KES-CDB (HC), 2025 WL 3501200 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2025); Clene C.D. v. Robbins, No. 1:25-CV-01463-KES-SKO (HC), 2026 WL 84302 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2026); W.V.S.M. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01489-KES-HBK (HC), 2025 WL 3236521 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2025); Bilal A. v. Wofford, No. 1:25-CV-01715-KES-HBK (HC), 2025 WL 3648366 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 16, 2025); Marina V.N. v. Robbins, No. 1:25-CV-01845-KES-SKO (HC), 2025 WL 3701960 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 21, 2025). The Court intends to rule directly on the [1] petition for writ of habeas corpus, with the understanding that the Court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in support of the [2] 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."); Dzhabrailov v. Decker, No. 20-CV-3118 (PMH), 2020 WL 2731966, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 26, 2020) (considering preliminary injunction and merits of habeas petition simultaneously). On or before March 3, 2026, respondents are ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE as to whether there are any factual or legal issues in this case that distinguish it from the Court's prior orders in Elmer Joel M. C. v. Wofford, Clene C.D. v. Robbins, W.V.S.M. v. Wofford, Bilal A. v. Wofford, and Marina V.N. v. Robbins and justify denying the petition, or indicate the matter is not substantively distinguishable. By February 28, 2026, to the extent not already accomplished, petitioners' counsel is directed: (1) to serve respondents with a copy of the petition, the motion for temporary restraining order, the accompanying papers, and a copy of this Order, by e-mail to all appropriate recipients including the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of California, with a copy to usacae.ecf2241-imm@usdoj.gov, and by overnight mail; and (2) promptly file proof of such service on the docket. Counsel for respondents shall promptly enter notices of appearance. Pending the Court's decision, and unless and until the Court orders otherwise, the Court ORDERS that respondents shall not transfer petitioners out of this District. See F.T.C. v. Dean Foods Co., 384 U.S. 597, 604 (1966) (noting court's "express authority under the All Writs Act to issue such temporary injunctions as may be necessary to protect its own jurisdiction"). |
| 5 | 2026-02-28 | Certificate / Proof of Service |
| 7 | 2026-03-03 | Dismiss |
| 8 | 2026-03-03 | Notice of Appearance |
| 10 | 2026-03-03 | Opposition to Motion |
| 11 | 2026-03-04 | Order on Motion for TRO |
| — | 2026-03-04 | Minute Order |
| 13 | 2026-03-09 | JUDGMENT dated *3/4/2026* pursuant to [11] order. CASE CLOSED. (Deputy Clerk SSA) |