Roben Bonyadian v. Todd M. Lyons, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Marcos Charles, Acting Executive Associate Director, Enforcement and Removal Operations, U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement; Markwayne Mullin, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Todd Blanche, Acting U.S. Attorney General; and DOE 1, Warden of California City Immigration Processing Center

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: May 7, 2026
• Docket: 1:26-cv-03504
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ROBEN BONYADIAN, Case No. 1:26-cv-03504 (AMO)

8 Petitioner, ORDER RE PETITION FOR WRIT OF 9 v. HABEAS CORPUS AND MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTAINING ORDER 10 TODD M. LYONS, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; Re: Dkt. Nos. 1, 2 11 MARCOS CHARLES, Acting Executive Associate Director, Enforcement and 12 Removal Operations, U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement; MARKWAYNE 13 MULLIN, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; TODD BLANCHE, 14 Acting U.S. Attorney General; and DOE 1, Warden of California City Immigration 15 Processing Center, Respondents. 16

17 The Court is in receipt of Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus (“Petition”) and Motion for 18 Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”). The Court intends to rule directly on the Petition, with the 19 understanding that the Court will also consider any arguments made and exhibits submitted in 20 support of the TRO. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2) (“Before or after beginning the hearing on a 21 motion for a preliminary injunction, the court may advance the trial on the merits and consolidate 22 it with the hearing.”); 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (“The court shall summarily hear and determine the facts, 23 and dispose of [a petitioner’s habeas petition] as law and justice require.”); Dzhabrailov v. Decker, 24 No. 20-cv-03118-PMH, 2020 WL 2731966, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. May 26, 2020) (considering 25 preliminary injunction and merits of habeas petition simultaneously). Respondents shall file a 26 response to the Petition within three (3) calendar days from the date of this Order. Any response 27 ] warrants or notices, and any other portions of Petitioner’s A-File relevant to the determination of 2 || the issues presented in the Petition. Failure to timely respond shall be construed as a non- 3 opposition. See L.R. 230(c). Petitioner may file a reply within five (5) calendar days from the date 4 || of this Order. Respondents are prohibited from deporting the Petitioner or removing him from the 5 || Eastern District of California while the TRO and Petition are pending. This matter is not set for a 6 || hearing though the Court may set one should it later be determined that a hearing is necessary. 7 || Counsel for Respondents shall promptly enter notices of appearance. 8 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 || Dated: May 7, 2026

CL ARACELI MARTINEZ-OLGUIN 13 United States District Judge

(44

Oo Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28